FIFTY  YEARS 
PUBLICS 


vtr*- 


FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 


Photo,  by  Prince  Tola,  H'ashington,  D.  C. 


FIFTY    YEARS 

OF 

PUBLIC    SERVICE 

PERSONAL  RECOLLECTIONS  OF 

SHELBY  M.  CULLOM 

SENIOR  UNITED  STATES  SENATOR  FROM  ILLINOIS 
WITH   PORTRAITS 


SECOND  EDITION 


CHICAGO 
A.  C.  McCLURG  &  CO. 

1911 


COPYRIGHT 

A.  C.  McCLURG  &  CO. 
1911 

Published  October,  1911 
Second  Edition,  December,  1911 


PRESS  OF    THE    VAIL    COMPANY 
COSHOCTON,    U.    S.    A. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I     BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR,  1829  TO  1855      .      .  1 
II     SERVICE  AS  CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD,  1855  AND 

1856    . .      ,      .      .  14 

III     ELECTION    TO    THE    ILLINOIS    LEGISLATURE:    LINCOLN- 
DOUGLAS  DEBATES,  1856  TO  1858  .      ...      .      .  22 

IV     OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS  OF  THAT  DAY,  1858 

AND  1859 33 

V     NOMINATION  OF  LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  FOR  THE  PRESI 
DENCY,  1859  AND  I860 57 

VI     SPEAKER  OF  THE  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE,  AND  A  MEM 
BER  OF  CONGRESS,  I860  TO  1865 74 

VII     LINCOLN,  I860  TO  1864 ,      .      .      .  82 

VIII     NOTABLES  IN  THE   THIRTY-NINTH   CONGRESS,   1864  TO 

1870   ........> 109 

IX     THE  IMPEACHMENT  OF  PRESIDENT  JOHNSON       .      .      .  143 
X     SPEAKER  OF  THE  LEGISLATURE,  AND  GOVERNOR,  1871  TO 

1883 159 

XI     GRANT 169 

XII     GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN 180 

XIII  GENERAL  JOHN  M.  PALMER 190 

XIV  GOVERNOR  RICHARD  J.  OGLESBY 198 

XV     SENATORIAL  CAREER,  1883  TO  1911 203 

XVI     CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM,  1884  TO  1887     ....  224 
XVII     CLEVELAND'S    DEFEAT    AND    HARRISON'S    FIRST    TERM, 

1888  TO  1891 246 

XVIII     CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM,  1892  TO  1896    .      .      .      .  257 

XIX     MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY,  1896  TO  1901  .....  272 

XX     ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY,  1901  TO  1909 292 

XXI     INTERSTATE  COMMERCE 305 

XXII     JOHN  MARSHALL  HARLAN 333 

XXIII  MEMBERS  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    .  338 

XXIV  WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    .      .  368 
XXV     THE  INTEROCEANIC  CANAL 380 

258766 


vi  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

XXVI     SANTO  DOMINGO'S  FISCAL  AFFAIRS 387 

XXVII  DIPLOMATIC  AGREEMENTS  BY  PROTOCOL  .      .     .      ..     .  3Q3 

XXVIII     ARBITRATION 396 

XXIX  TITLES  AND  DECORATIONS  FROM  FOREIGN  POWERS     .      .  407 

XXX  ISLE  OF  PINES,  DANISH  WEST  INDIES,  AND  ALGECIRAS    .  412 

XXXI  CONGRESS  UNDER  THE  TAFT  ADMINISTRATION      .      .      .  419 

XXXII  LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL:  LINCOLN  LIBRARY    ....  428 

XXXIII  CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  UNITED  STATES  SENATE      .  436 

XXXIV  CONCLUSION.,,,,.     .      f     .*.   £ 456 

INDEX                                                  .         "...      .      .  461 


LIST  OF  PORTRAITS 

PAGE 

S.  M.  CULLOM ,      .      .      .      .      .      .       Frontispiece 

SHELBY  M.  CULLOM,  WHILE  A  LAW  STUDENT  ........      16 

RICHARD   YATES     ...............      44 

STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS 64 

ABRAHAM  LINCOLN  •      . 106 

JAMES  G.  BLAINE 120 

ANDREW  JOHNSON       .      .      .      ...      .      .      .      .      .    ,.      .      .146 

SHELBY  M.  CULLOM,  WHILE  GOVERNOR  OF  ILLINOIS 164 

ULYSSES  S.  GRANT      .      .      . •      •      •      .176 

JOHN  A.  LOGAN 184 

JOHN  M.  PALMER       ...»•••      •      .......   194 

RICHARD  J.  OGLESBY        .      .      .      .      .      .      •      .      ...      .      .    200 

GROVER  CLEVELAND    .      .      .      ...      .      . 218 

JAMES  A.  GARFIELD 230 

WILLIAM  McKiNLEY  .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .   274 

WILLIAM  HOWARD  TAFT  .      ...      .      .      .      .      .      •      •      .    '.   302 

CUSHMAN  K.  DAVIS 340 

WILLIAM  P.  FRYE 346 

JOHN  C.  SPOONER 360 

THEODORE  ROOSEVELT 390 

ELIHU  ROOT    , 420 


FOREWORD 

OH,  that  mine  adversary  had  written  a  book!" 
Such  was  the  exclamation  of  one  who,  through  the 
centuries,  has  been  held  up  to  the  world  as  the  symbol  of  pa 
tience  and  long  suffering  endurance,  and  who  believed  that 
he  thus  expressed  the  surest  method  of  confounding  an 
enemy. 

I  have  come  to  that  age  in  life  where  I  feel  somewhat  in 
different  as  to  consequences,  and,  yielding  to  the  suggestions 
and  insistence  of  friends,  I  determined  that  I  would  under 
take  to  write  some  recollections,  as  they  occurred  to  me,  of 
the  men  and  events  of  my  time. 

Naturally,  to  me  the  history  of  the  period  covered  by  my 
life  since  1829  is  particularly  interesting.  I  do  not  think 
that  those  who  do  me  the  honor  of  reading  this  narrative  will 
say  that  I  am  prejudiced  when  I  assert  that  while  this  period 
has  not  been  great  in  Art  and  Letters,  from  a  material, 
scientific,  and  industrial  standpoint  it  has  been  the  most  won 
derful  epoch  in  all  the  world's  history. 

About  the  period  of  my  birth  General  Andrew  Jackson 
was  first  elected  President  of  the  United  States.  Jackson 
to  me  has  always  been  an  interesting  character.  Theodore 
Roosevelt  has  declared  very  little  respect  for  him,  and  has 
written  deprecatingly  —  I  might  say,  even  abusively  —  of 
him.  But  the  truth  is,  there  were  never  two  Presidents  in 
the  White  House  who,  in  many  respects,  resembled  each 
other  more  nearly  than  Jackson  and  Roosevelt. 

Jackson  was  sixty-one  years  old  when  elected  President  — 
an  unusually  old  man  to  be  elected  to  that  high  office;  and 

ix 


x  FOREWORD 

he  had  served  his  country  during  the  War  of  the  Revolution. 
When  I  consider  this  the  thought  occurs  to  me,  How  young 
as  a  Nation  we  are,  after  all.  Why,  I  date  almost  back  to 
the  Revolution!  President  Taft  jocularly  remarked  to  me 
recently:  "Here's  my  old  friend,  Uncle  Shelby.  He 
comes  nearer  connecting  the  present  with  the  days  of  Wash 
ington  than  any  one  whom  I  know."  And  I  suppose  there 
are  few  men  in  public  life  whose  careers  extend  farther  into 
the  past  than  mine. 

During  my  early  life  the  survivors  of  the  Revolutionary 
War,  to  say  nothing  of  the  War  of  1812,  were  very  numer 
ous  and  abundantly  in  evidence.  Up  to  that  time,  no  man 
who  had  not  served  his  country  in  some  capacity  in  the  Revo 
lutionary  War  had  been  elevated  to  the  Presidency,  and  this 
was  the  case  until  the  year  1843. 

During  the  year  1829  the  crown  of  Great  Britain  de 
scended  from  King  George  IV  to  King  William  IV.  That 
reign  passed  away,  and  I  have  lived  to  see  the  long  reign  of 
Victoria  come  and  go,  the  reign  of  Edward  VII  come  and 
go,  and  the  accession  of  King  George  V.  Charles  X  ruled 
in  France,  Francis  I  in  Austria  (the  reign  of  Francis  Joseph 
had  not  yet  begun),  Frederick  William  III  in  Prussia, 
Nicholas  I  in  Russia;  while  Leo  XII  governed  the  Papal 
States,  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  not  yet  having  come  into  ex 
istence.  The  [United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire 
land  had  not  yet  a  population  of  24,000,000,  all  told. 

From  the  dawn  of  this  epoch  may  well  date  the  practical 
beginning  of  a  long  cycle  of  political  and  intellectual  up 
heaval,  and  the  readjustment  of  relations  which  go  to  make 
up  world-history,  arriving  at  a  culmination  in  our  great 
Civil  War. 

In  the  last  half -century  —  nay,  I  might  say,  within  the 
last  two  decades  —  there  has  been  a  mighty  impulse  in  the  di- 


FOREWORD  xi 

rection  of  scientific  investigation,  of  mechanical  invention,  of 
preventive  medicine,  of  economic  improvement,  and  the  like. 
Germany,  in  some  respects,  has  led,  but  our  own  country  has 
not  been  far  behind.  Independent  research  has  been  won 
derfully  productive,  and  rivalry  has  been  keen.  Often  the 
mere  suggestion  of  one  scientist  has  been  taken  up  and  elabo 
rated  (or  discredited)  by  other  scientists;  the  idea  of  one  in 
ventor  has  been  seized  upon  and  bettered,  or  possibly  proved 
valueless,  by  other  inventors.  The  paths  to  the  remote  and 
inaccessible  have  been  toiled  over  by  rival  explorers;  new 
records  have  been  made  by  rival  aviators;  while  competitive 
and  cooperative  activities  in  every  line  have  known  a  phe 
nomenal  growth.  New  names  have  been  placed  in  the  Pan 
theon  of  the  immortals,  new  planets  discovered  in  the  solar 
system,  new  stars  added  to  the  clear  skies  of  our  nightly 
vision.  Out  of  all  the  striving  has  come  a  sweeping  advance 
in  lingual  requirements.  In  most  departments  of  Science, 
Art,  and  Manufacture,  the  processes  and  methods  of  to-day 
are  not  those  of  yesterday,  and  the  doers  of  new  things  have 
freely  coined  new  words  or  given  new  meanings  to  old  ones. 
The  most  complete  and  exhaustive  encyclopaedia  of  yester 
day  is  to-day  found  not  entirely  adequate  to  the  already  in 
creased  wants.  Upon  all  these  momentous  factors  must 
these  "Recollections,"  in  one  way  or  another,  touch  from 
time  to  time. 

SHELBY  M.  CULLOM. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 
July,  1911. 


FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC 
SERVICE 

CHAPTER  I 

BIRTH    TO   ADMISSION    TO   THE   BAR 

1829  TO  1855 

TIDES  of  migration  set  in  about  the  close  of  the  Revo 
lutionary  War,  originating  in  the  most  populous  of 
the  late  Colonies  (now  States) ,  debouching  from  the  western 
slopes  of  the  mountain  border-passes  into  the  headwaters  of 
Kentucky's  rivers,  and  mingling  at  last  in  the  fertile  val 
leys  through  which  those  rivers,  in  their  lower  reaches,  find 
an  outlet  into  the  Ohio. 

The  westward  flowing  current  brought  with  it  two  fam 
ilies  —  the  Culloms  of  Maryland,  and  the  Coffeys  of  North 
Carolina  —  who  settled  in  a  beautiful  valley,  not  far  from 
the  banks  of  the  Cumberland,  which  bore  the  euphonious 
name  of  Elk  Spring  Valley.  Richard  Northcraft  Cullom, 
of  the  first-named  family,  married  Elizabeth  Coffey.  They 
remained  in  Kentucky  until  seven  children  had  been  born  to 
them,  I  being  the  seventh,  the  date  of  my  birth  occurring  on 
the  twenty-second  day  of  November,  1829.  We  were  a 
large  family,  but  not  extraordinarily  numerous  for  those 
times,  there  being  five  brothers  and  seven  sisters. 

Kentucky  was  a  Slave  State,  and  my  father  did  not  be- 

1 


2        FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

:  lieve  in  slavery.  He  was  only  fairly  well  to  do,  and  after 
considering  the  situation  he  determined  to  seek  a  home  in  a 
Free  State  and  live  there  to  the  end  of  his  days. 

A  treaty  with  the  Indians  in  1784,  at  Fort  Stanwix,  had 
secured  from  the  Iroquois  all  claims  to  the  lands  which  now 
make  up  the  States  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois.  At  the 
time  of  our  removal  the  State  of  Illinois  was  only  eleven 
years  old,  and  but  a  small  portion  of  it  had  any  considerable 
settlements.  These  were  mainly  in  the  south  half  of  the 
State.  Chicago  was  then  a  small  village,  Fort  Dearborn 
being  at  that  time  of  more  consequence  than  the  village. 
Now  Chicago  is  the  second  greatest  city  in  the  Union  in 
population  and  business. 

My  father,  together  with  Alfred  Phillips  and  William 
Brown,  his  two  brothers-in-law,  entered  land  in  the  same 
portion  of  the  County  of  Tazewell,  and  at  once,  on  their 
arrival  from  Kentucky,  pitched  their  tents  and  began  the 
erection  of  log  cabins,  in  preparation  for  winter.  Phillips 
was  a  large,  vigorous  man,  both  in  body  and  mind.  He 
was  a  man  of  the  highest  integrity,  and  soon  became  one 
of  the  leading  citizens  of  Tazewell  County,  continuing  so 
until  his  death.  William  Brown  was  a  Methodist  preacher, 
and  was  a  worthy  example  of  the  consistent  minister  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ.  He  was  called  upon  by  the  people  for 
many  miles  around  to  perform  ceremonies  on  wedding  oc 
casions  and,  in  times  of  sorrow,  to  preach  at  the  funerals  of 
departed  friends. 

My  father  lived  longer  than  either  Phillips  or  Brown. 
They  both  raised  large  families,  and  to-day  the  youngest 
son  of  Phillips  —  the  Hon.  Isaac  N.  Phillips  —  is  recog 
nized  as  one  of  the  able  lawyers  of  the  State,  and  is  the 
reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Illinois.  My  father  was 
a  farmer,  but  he  always  took  great  interest  in  the  affairs  of 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR        3 

the  country,  and  especially  of  the  State  in  -which  he  lived. 
He  was  a  Whig,  and  believed  in  Henry  Clay.  He  took  an 
active  part  in  political  campaigns,  and  was  several  times  a 
member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  State  Legis 
lature,  and  once  of  the  State  Senate. 

Tazewell  County,  in  which  he  resided,  became  a  very  strong 
Whig  county,  the  Whigs  having  their  own  way  until  the 
Free-soil  party,  which  soon  became  the  Republican  party, 
took  its  place  as  against  the  Democratic  party.  When  that 
time  came,  Tazewell,  like  Sangamon,  became  Democratic. 
Sangamon  County,  in  which  I  live,  and  Tazewell  County,  in 
which  I  was  raised,  were  both  strong  Whig  counties  while 
the  Whig  party  survived;  but  when  it  died,  the  population 
being  largely  from  Kentucky  and  other  Southern  States, 
naturally  sympathized  with  the  South  on  the  question  of 
slavery.  They  drifted  into  the  Democratic  party  in  large 
numbers,  and  gave  the  control  to  the  Democracy  for  a  time ; 
and  the  two  parties  still  struggle  for  control  in  both  counties. 

My  father  became  well  acquainted  with  Abraham  Lincoln 
while  the  latter  was  a  young  man.  The  first  time  I  ever 
heard  of  Lincoln,  was  when  two  men  came  to  my  father's 
house  to  consult  with  him  on  the  question  of  employing  an 
attorney  to  attend  to  a  law  case  for  them  at  the  approaching 
term  of  the  Circuit  Court.  I  remember  hearing  my  father 
say  to  them  that  if  Judge  Stephen  T.  Logan  should  be  in 
attendance  at  court,  they  should  employ  him;  but  if  he 
were  not,  a  young  man  named  Lincoln  would  be  there,  who 
would  do  just  about  as  well.  Readers  will  see  by  this  that 
while  Lincoln  was  yet  a  young  man  he  was  ranked  among 
the  foremost  lawyers  at  the  Bar.  At  that  time  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  was  beginning  to  be  heard  from. 

Judge  Logan  was  one  of  the  best  lawyers  of  the  Missis 
sippi  Valley.  He  was  a  Kentuckian  by  birth,  and,  as  a 


4        FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

lawyer,  was  a  very  great  man.  Douglas  was  a  great  states 
man  and  a  leader  of  men;  a  great  debater,  but,  in  my  opinion, 
not  a  great  lawyer.  The  law  is  a  jealous  mistress;  there  are 
no  great  lawyers  who  do  not  give  undivided  attention  to  its 
study,  and  Douglas  devoted  much  time  to  public  affairs. 

On  the  arrival  of  my  father  at  the  grove  where  he  had 
previously  determined  to  locate  his  family,  he  pitched  his  tent 
near  a  little  stream,  then  called  Mud  Creek,  afterwards  called 
Deer  Creek,  because  it  was  a  great  resort  for  wild  deer. 
He  soon  erected  a  log  cabin  and  moved  into  it  with  his 
family.  I  was  less  than  one  year  old  when  the  family  located 
in  Illinois.  We  lived  in  the  cabin  for  several  years.  It  was 
not  a  single  cabin,  but  there  were  two  cabins  connected  to 
gether  by  a  covered  porch;  which  was  a  very  pleasant  ar 
rangement  in  both  summer  and  winter. 

Finally,  my  father  built  a  frame  house.  During  all  this 
time  the  wild  deer  were  numerous,  and  often  I  have  counted 
from  the  door  from  five  to  twenty  deer  feeding  in  a  slough 
not  a  quarter  of  a  mile  away. 

I  never  killed  a  deer.  The  beautiful  animals  always 
seemed  to  me  so  innocent  that  I  had  not  the  heart  to  shoot 
them. 

The  Winter  of  1830-31  was  long  remembered  by  the  early 
settlers  of  Illinois,  and  of  all  the  now  so-called  Middle  States, 
as  the  "winter  of  the  deep  snow."  For  months  it  was  im 
possible  to  pass  from  one  community  to  another  in  the 
country. 

My  education  was  obtained  at  the  local  schools  and  at  the 
seminary  at  Mount  Morris  two  hundred  miles  distant  from 
my  father's  home. 

In  my  boyhood  years  there  were  no  common  schools. 
There  were  only  such  schools  in  the  country  as  the  people  by 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR        5 

subscription  saw  proper  to  provide.  The  schoolhouse  in  the 
neighborhood  in  which  I  lived  was  built  of  logs,  covered 
with  thick  boards,  and  supplied  with  rude  benches  on  its 
puncheon  floor  for  the  scholars  to  sit  upon.  We  sat  bolt  up 
right,  there  being  nothing  to  lean  against.  There  were  no 
desks  for  our  books ;  and  had  desks  been  obtainable  there  were 
but  few  books  to  use  or  to  care  for.  We  boys  whispered  to 
the  girls  at  our  peril ;  but  we  took  the  risk  occasionally. 

It  was  my  duty  as  a  school-boy,  after  doing  the  chores  and 
work  inseparable  from  farm  life,  to  walk  every  morning  a 
long  distance  over  rough  country  roads  to  school.  After  I 
had  attained  to  a  fair  common-school  education,  I  concluded 
that  I  could  teach  a  country  school,  and  was  employed  to 
teach  in  the  neighborhood ;  first  for  three  months  at  eighteen 
dollars  per  month,  and  then  for  a  second  term  of  three 
months  at  twenty.  I  think  I  have  a  right  to  assume  that  I 
did  well  as  a  teacher,  since  the  patrons  raised  my  wages  for 
the  second  term  two  dollars  per  month. 

My  efforts  in  teaching  school  did  not  secure  sufficient  funds 
to  enable  me  to  remain  at  school  away  from  home  very  long, 
and  I  determined  to  try  another  plan.  My  father  had  five 
yoke  of  oxen.  I  prevailed  on  him  to  lend  them  to  me.  I 
obtained  a  plough  which  cut  a  furrow  eighteen  to  twenty 
inches  wide,  and  with  the  oxen  and  plough  I  broke  prairie  for 
some  months.  I  thereby  secured  sufficient  money,  with  the 
additional  sums  which  I  made  from  the  institution  at  Mount 
Morris  at  odd  times,  to  enable  me  to  remain  at  the  Mount 
Morris  Seminary  for  two  years. 

I  never  shall  forget  the  journey  from  my  home  in  Taze- 
well  County  to  Mount  Morris,  when  I  first  left  home  to  enter 
the  school.  As  it  well  illustrates  the  difficulties  and  hardships 
of  travel  in  those  early  days  in  Illinois,  I  may  be  pardoned 
for  giving  it  somewhat  in  detail. 


6        FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

It  was  in  the  Spring  of  the  year.  My  father  started  with 
me  on  horseback  from  my  home  in  Tazewell  County  to 
Peoria,  a  distance  of  fifteen  miles.  A  sudden  freeze  had 
taken  place  after  the  frost  had  gone  out  of  the  ground,  and 
this  had  caused  an  icy  crust  to  form  over  the  mud,  but  not 
of  sufficient  strength  to  bear  the  weight  of  a  horse,  whose 
hoofs  would  constantly  break  through.  Whereupon  I  dis 
mounted  and  told  father  that  he  had  better  take  the  horses 
back  home,  and  that  I  would  go  to  Peoria  on  foot,  which 
I  did. 

The  weather  was  cold,  and  I  was  certainly  used  up  when 
I  arrived  in  Peoria.  I  went  to  bed,  departing  early  the  fol 
lowing  morning,  by  steamer,  for  Peru,  a  distance  of  twenty- 
five  miles.  From  there  I  took  the  stage-coach  to  Dixon,  a 
distance  of  twelve  miles. 

There  came  up  another  storm  during  the  journey  from 
Peru  to  Dixon,  and  the  driver  of  the  stage-coach  lost  his  way 
and  could  not  keep  in  the  road.  I  ran  along  in  front  of  the 
coach  most  of  the  way,  in  order  to  keep  it  in  the  road,  the 
horses  following  me.  From  Dixon  I  crossed  the  river,  pro 
ceeding  to  Mount  Morris  by  private  conveyance.  I  never 
had  a  more  severe  trip,  and  I  felt  its  effects  for  very  many 
years  afterwards. 

The  days  I  spent  in  old  Mount  Morris  Seminary  were  the 
pleasantest  of  my  life.  I  was  just  at  the  age  which  might  be 
termed  the  formative  period  of  a  young  man's  career.  Had 
I  been  surrounded  then  by  other  companions,  by  other  en 
vironment,  my  whole  future  might  have  been  entirely  differ 
ent.  Judged  by  the  standard  of  the  great  Eastern  institu 
tions,  Mount  Morris  was  not  even  a  third-class  college ;  but  it 
was  a  good  school,  attended  by  young  men  of  an  unusually 
high  order.  In  those  early  days  it  was  the  leading  institution 
of  higher  learning  in  Northern  Illinois.  I  enjoyed  Mount 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR        7 

Morris,  and  the  friendships  formed  there  continued  through 
out  my  life. 

I  do  not  know  whether  I  was  a  popular  student  or  not,  but 
I  was  president  of  the  Amphictyon  Society,  and,  according 
to  the  usual  custom,  was  to  deliver  the  address  on  retiring 
from  the  presidency.  During  the  course  of  the  address  I 
fainted  and  was  carried  from  the  chapel,  which  was  very  hot 
and  very  crowded.  I  was  rolled  around  in  the  snow  a  while 
and  speedily  revived.  I  was  immediately  asked  to  let  one  of 
the  boys  read  the  remainder  of  the  address,  but  the  heroic 
treatment  to  which  I  had  been  subjected  stirred  me  to  pro 
fane  indifference  respecting  its  fate.  Later  I  was  selected 
to  deliver  the  valedictory.  So  I  suppose  I  must  have  enjoyed 
a  reasonable  degree  of  popularity  among  my  fellow  students. 

It  was  at  Mount  Morris  that  I  first  became  intimate  with 
the  late  Robert  R.  Hitt.  He  and  his  brother  John,  who  re 
cently  died,  were  classmates  of  mine,  their  father  being  the 
resident  Methodist  preacher  at  Mount  Morris.  Robert  R. 
Hitt  remained  my  friend  from  our  school  days  until  his  death. 
He  was  a  candidate  for  the  Senate  against  me  at  one  time, 
but  he  was  no  politician,  and  I  defeated  him  so  easily  that  he 
could  not  harbor  a  bitter  feeling  against  me.  He  was  quite 
a  character,  and  enjoyed  a  long  and  distinguished  public 
career  in  Illinois.  One  of  the  early  shorthand  reporters  of 
the  State,  the  reporter  of  the  Lincoln-Douglas  debates,  he 
became  intimate  with  Lincoln,  and  Lincoln  was  very  fond  of 
him.  He  filled  numerous  important  positions  at  home  and 
abroad,  and  married  a  most  beautiful  lady,  who  still  survives. 
He  was  later  appointed  Secretary  of  Legation  at  Paris. 

Bob  Hitt  told  me  that  he  asked  President  Grant  for  the 
appointment,  and  the  President  at  once  said  that  he  would 
give  it  to  him.  Washburne,  who  had  been  Secretary  of  State 
for  a  few  days,  and  who  was  then  minister  at  Paris,  was  much 


8        FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

astonished  when  Hitt  appeared  and  said  that  he  had  been  ap 
pointed  Secretary  of  Legation.  Mr.  Washburne  denounced 
both  President  Grant  and  Secretary  of  State  Fish  for  ap 
pointing  anybody  to  fill  such  an  intimate  position  without  his 
consent. 

Ambassadors  and  ministers,  however,  are  not  consulted  as 
to  who  shall  be  appointed  secretaries.  These  appointments 
are  made  by  the  President,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  con 
sent  of  the  Senate;  but  Mr.  Washburne,  as  usual,  thought 
that  he  was  a  bigger  man  than  any  one  else,  and  that  an  ex 
ception  should  have  been  made  in  his  case.  But,  when  offi 
cially  informed  of  the  appointment,  he  submitted  gracefully, 
and  they  got  along  together  quite  amicably.  Strange  to  say, 
Hitt  represented  Washburne's  old  district  in  Congress  for  a 
number  of  years  —  many  more  years  than  Washburne  him 
self  represented  it. 

It  was  as  a  member  of  Congress  that  Mr.  Hitt  distin 
guished  himself.  He  did  what  every  man  should  do  who  ex 
pects  to  make  a  reputation  as  a  national  legislator;  and  that 
is  to  specialize,  to  become  an  expert  in  some  particular  branch. 
He  was  peculiarly  fitted  for  foreign  affairs.  He  was  a  man 
of  education  and  culture,  a  student  always,  had  served  abroad 
for  years,  had  mingled  in  the  highest  society,  and  it  is  not 
strange  that  in  a  comparatively  few  years  he  was  recognized 
as  the  leading  authority  on  all  matters  coming  before  the 
House  pertaining  to  our  foreign  relations. 

The  Foreign  Affairs  Committee  of  the  House  is  not  nearly 
so  important  a  committee  as  the  Foreign  Relations  Commit 
tee  of  the  Senate,  and  I  may  be  pardoned  for  saying  this,  as 
I  am  chairman  of  the  latter  committee  myself. 

The  reason  is  this :  The  Constitution  provides  that  treaties 
shall  be  made  only  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate ; 
hence  it  is  that  all  such  treaties,  and  consequently  the  foreign 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR        9 

policy  of  the  general  Government,  must  pass  the  scrutiny  of 
the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate  while  the 
House  and  its  committees  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with 
them. 

But  nevertheless  of  all  the  House  committees,  that  of 
Foreign  Affairs  is  at  times  the  foremost,  and  it  never  had  an 
abler  chairman  than  Robert  R.  Hitt.  He  was  certainly  in 
the  most  remarkable  degree  what  might  be  termed  a  special 
ist  in  legislation.  He  gave  but  scant  attention  to  any  other 
branch  of  legislation.  He  had  little  time  or  liking  for  the 
tariff ,  finance,  appropriations,  or  for  any  branch  of  legisla 
tion  that  failed  to  come  within  his  own  especial  province.  He 
was,  in  fact,  so  indifferent  to  the  general  business  of  the 
House  that  he  told  me  one  day  that  he  did  not  even  take  the 
trouble  to  select  a  regular  seat ;  that  when  any  question  came 
up  in  which  he  was  interested  he  would  talk  from  the  seat  of 
some  absent  colleague.  Hence  it  was  that  he  was  seldom 
seen  on  the  floor  of  the  House  except  when  some  question 
was  raised  concerning  our  foreign  relations ;  at  which  time  he 
was  immediately  sent  for.  And  it  is  only  justice  to  him  to 
say  that  he  was  the  only  man  in  the  House  in  his  time,  and  no 
one  has  since  appeared  there,  who  could  so  successfully  de 
fend  or  attack  the  policy  of  an  administration  concerning  its 
foreign  affairs. 

The  late  Senator  Morgan  of  Alabama,  a  most  extraordi 
nary  character,  of  whom  I  shall  have  something  to  say  later, 
and  Robert  R.  Hitt  and  myself  were  appointed  members  of 
a  commission  to  frame  a  form  of  government  for  the  Terri 
tory  of  Hawaii,  which  we  had  just  acquired.  We  travelled 
to  Hawaii  together.  No  two  more  delightful,  entertaining, 
or  interesting  men  could  be  found.  They  are  both  dead,  and 
it  was  my  sad  privilege  to  eulogize  their  public  achievements 
in  the  Senate. 


10      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

In  what  I  am  writing  from  time  to  time,  now,  as  the  months 
and  years  go  by,  when  I  have  the  leisure  from  my  public 
duties  to  devote  to  it,  and  without  knowing  whether  what  I 
am  writing  will  ever  be  published,  I  do  not  want  to  eulogize 
any  one.  If  what  I  say  about  men  and  events  shall  offend 
their  friends  living,  I  can  not  help  it.  I  want  only  to  give 
my  own  estimate  of  the  men  wrhom  I  have  known.  Robert 
R.  Hitt  was  a  good  man;  his  honesty  and  uprightness  were 
never  questioned;  he  never  did  a  great  deal  for  his  district; 
but  he  was  one  of  the  most  useful  legislators  in  his  own  line  - 
foreign  affairs  —  whom  I  have  ever  known  during  my  service 
in  Congress.  I  think  this  is  a  fair  and  just  estimate  of  him. 

But  to  return  to  Mount  Morris,  Professor  D.  J.  Pinckney 
was  president  of  the  Seminary  when  I  was  a  student  there. 
He  knew  my  father  intimately,  and  naturally  took  more  than 
ordinary  interest  in  me.  When  I  became  ill  at  school,  he 
took  me  into  his  own  home  and  kept  me  there  for  a  month  or 
more,  treating  me  with  the  greatest  kindness  and  consid 
eration. 

Years  after  I  left  the  institution  he  became  interested  in 
politics,  and  ran  as  an  independent  for  Congress  against 
Horatio  C.  Burchard,  Republican  (who  was,  by  the  way,  a 
very  excellent  man  and  my  friend).  Burchard  defeated 
him.  When  the  campaign  was  on  I  was  invited  to  go  to 
Galena  and  make  a  speech  for  Mr.  Burchard.  It  never  oc 
curred  to  me  at  the  time  that  I  was  going  into  Pinckney's 
district;  but  when  I  discovered  the  truth,  I  could  not  very 
well  back  out.  I  made  my  speech,  but  was  careful  not  to 
say  a  word  against  Professor  Pinckney,  simply  advocating 
the  election  of  Mr.  Burchard  as  a  good  Republican.  Profes 
sor  Pinckney,  however,  took  great  offence,  and  was  very  cold 
toward  me  from  that  time  until  his  death.  I  felt  that  he  had 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR      11 

been  misled,  that  it  would  all  come  right,  and  that  some  day 
I  would  have  a  plain  talk  with  him;  but  he  died  before  we 
ever  got  together.  He  has  a  son  now  living  in  Chicago,  a 
prominent  circuit  judge  of  Cook  County. 

Among  other  classmates  of  mine  at  Mount  Morris,  was  the 
late  General  John  A.  Rawlins,  who  became  a  distinguished 
officer  and  was  General  Grant's  chief  of  staff.  No  better, 
no  truer,  man  ever  lived  than  General  Rawlins.  He  was  es 
sentially  a  good  man  and  never  had  a  bad  habit. 

Rawlins  was  a  Democrat,  and  a  strong  one,  during  his 
school  days,  and  I  believe  that  he  remained  one  until  the  Civil 
War.  Robert  Hitt  and  his  brother  John,  together  with 
Rawlins  and  myself,  formed  a  sort  of  four-in-hand,  and 
we  were  very  intimate.  We  would  take  part  in  the  discus 
sions  in  our  society,  and  Rawlins  was  especially  strong  when 
a  political  question  was  raised.  I  have  heard  him,  during  his 
school  days,  make  speeches  that  would  have  done  credit  to  a 
statesman.  He  would  have  done  himself  and  country  credit 
in  any  civil  office.  He  served  as  Secretary  of  War  a  few 
months.  Like  so  many  others  who  entered  the  war  without 
the  slightest  military  training,  he  came  out  of  it  with  a  bril 
liant  record  as  an  officer  and  soldier. 

Judge  Moses  Hallett,  a  United  States  judge,  retired,  of 
Colorado,  was  another  classmate  of  mine.  He  was  an  excep 
tionally  good  man,  and  developed  into  a  very  able  lawyer  and 
judge.  He  is  still  living,  and  has  become  quite  wealthy 
through  fortunate  real-estate  investments  in  the  vicinity  of 
Denver. 

But  I  fear  I  might  tire  the  reader  by  dwelling  longer  on 
my  school  life  at  Mount  Morris.  To  look  back  over  those 
happy  early  days  is  interesting  to  me;  but  it  is  sad  to  think 
how  few,  how  very  few,  of  my  schoolmates,  then  just  begin 
ning  the  journey  of  life,  with  all  the  enthusiasm  and  hope  of 


12      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

youth,  are  living  to-day.  They  soon  scattered,  some  to  one 
vocation,  some  to  another;  some  to  achieve  distinction  and 
fame,  some  failure ;  but  certain  it  is  that  I  know  of  very  few 
who  are  now  living. 

My  health  was  impaired  when  I  left  school,  and  I  returned 
home  to  work  on  the  farm.  Soon  I  became  strong  again,  but 
the  labor  was  so  arduous  and  uncongenial  that  I  determined 
upon  a  change:  if  there  was  any  other  way  of  making  an 
honest  living,  I  would  try  to  find  it. 

In  the  meantime  I  had  leased  a  farm  of  one  hundred  and 
sixty  acres  from  my  father.  When  Spring  came  I  told  him 
that  I  wanted  to  be  released  from  my  contract;  that  I  had 
deliberately  come  to  the  conclusion  that  I  could  make  my 
living  some  other  way  —  that  I  intended  to  study  law.  My 
father  did  not  hesitate  to  relieve  me  of  my  obligations,  and  in 
the  succeeding  October,  1853,  I  started  for  Springfield  to 
enter  upon  the  study  of  law.  I  consulted  with  Abraham 
Linco]n,  and  on  his  advice  I  entered  the  law  offices  of  Stuart 
and  Edwards,  both  of  whom  were  Whigs  and  friends  of  my 
father.  They  were  both  very  good  men  and  distinguished 
lawyers. 

At  that  time  Abraham  Lincoln  and  Stephen  T.  Logan  and 
Stuart  and  Edwards  were  the  four  ablest  lawyers  of  the 
capital  city.  I  studied  two  years  in  the  offices  of  Stuart  and 
Edwards,  pursuing  the  usual  life  of  a  law  student  in  a  coun 
try  law  office,  and  was  admitted  to  the  Bar  in  1855,  and 
elected  City  Attorney  the  same  year. 

Meanwhile,  however,  I  had  been  ill  of  typhoid  fever  for 
several  months.  During  the  period  of  my  convalescence  I 
was  advised  to  return  to  my  home  in  the  country  and  spend 
much  time  riding  horseback.  I  did  so,  but  the  time  seemed 
to  drag,  and  finally  I  went  to  the  city  of  Peoria  to  learn 


BIRTH  TO  ADMISSION  TO  THE  BAR      13 

whether  I  could  direct  my  restorative  exercise  to  an  ad 
ditional  profitable  end.  The  result  was  that  for  several 
ensuing-  weeks  I  rode  about  the  countryside,  buying  hogs 
for  Ting  &  Brotherson;  at  the  expiration  of  which  time 
I  had  regained  my  health,  was  richer  by  about  five  hundred 
dollars,  and  was  thus  enabled  to  return  at  once  to  Springfield 
and  take  up  again  my  interrupted  studies. 

Having  been  inducted  into  the  office  of  City  Attorney, 
I  was  fairly  launched  upon  a  political  career,  exceeding  in 
length  of  unbroken  service  that  of  any  other  public  man  in 
the  country's  history.  In  fact  I  never  accepted  but  two 
executive  appointments:  the  first  was  an  unsought  appoint 
ment  by  Abraham  Lincoln,  after  he  had  become  the  central 
figure  of  his  time,  if  not  of  all  time;  and,  second,  an  ap 
pointment  from  President  McKinley  as  chairman  of  the 
Hawaiian  Commission. 


CHAPTER  II 

SERVICE  AS  CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD 

1855  AND  1856 

MY  election  as  City  Attorney  of  Springfield  signalized 
at  once  my  active  interest  in  politics  at  the  very  mo 
ment  when  the  war  cloud  was  beginning  to  take  shape  in 
the  political  heavens  —  a  portentous  cloud,  but  recognized  as 
such  at  that  time  by  comparatively  few  of  the  thinking  peo 
ple.  It  had  seemed  certain  for  years  that  a  struggle  was 
sure  to  come.  Being  a  very  young  man,  I  suppose  I  did 
not  realize  the  horrors  of  a  civil  war,  but  I  watched  with 
keen  interest  the  signs  of  dissolution  in  political  parties,  and 
realignments  in  party  ties. 

In  1854  the  country  seemed  on  the  verge  of  a  war  with 
Spain  over  Cuba  which  happily  was  averted.  The  Black 
Warrior  had  been  seized  in  Havana  Harbor,  and  the  ex 
citement  throughout  the  country  when  Congress  prepared 
to  suspend  the  neutrality  laws  between  the  United  States  and 
Spain  was  intense. 

It  was  about  this  time  also  that  the  famous  Ostend  mani 
festo  was  issued  without  authority  from  any  one.  The 
American  representatives  at  the  Courts  of  England,  France, 
and  Spain  met  at  Ostend  to  confer  on  the  best  method  of 
settling  the  difficulties  concerning  Cuba  and  obtaining  pos 
session  of  the  island.  They  issued  a  manifesto  in  which 
they  recommended  that  Cuba  should  be  purchased  if  possible, 
failing  which  that  it  should  be  taken  by  force : 

14 


CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD       15 

"If  Spain,  actuated  by  stubborn  pride  and  a  false  sense  of  honor, 
should  refuse  to  sell  Cuba  to  the  United  States,  then  by  every  law,  hu 
man  and  divine,  we  shall  be  justified  in  wresting  it  from  Spain,  if  we 
possess  the  power." 

The  Ostend  manifesto  was  repudiated;  but  it  is  certain 
that  we  would  have  then  intervened  in  favor  of  freeing  Cuba, 
had  it  not  been  for  the  dark  war  clouds  which  were  so  quickly 
gathering  over  our  own  country. 

Among  the  other  vital  conditions  which  helped  to  keep 
the  country's  interest  and  attention  divided  at  this  critical 
time  was  the  Missouri  Compromise  repeal,  May  30,  1855. 
This  repealing  act  early  began  to  bear  political  fruit.  Al 
ready  treaties  had  been  made  with  half  a  score  of  the  Indian 
Nations  in  Kansas,  by  which  the  greater  part  of  the  soil  for 
two  hundred  miles  west  was  opened.  Settlers,  principally 
from  Missouri,  immediately  began  to  flock  in,  and  with  the 
first  attempt  to  hold  an  election  a  bloody  epoch  set  in  for 
that  region  between  the  pro-slavery  and  anti-slavery  fac 
tions,  fanned  by  attempts  in  Massachusetts  and  other  East 
ern  States  to  make  of  Kansas  a  Free  State. 

By  methods  of  intimidation,  Whitfield,  a  slave-holder, 
was  elected  the  first  delegate  to  Congress.  At  a  second  elec 
tion  thirteen  State  Senators  and  twenty-six  members  of  a 
Lower  House  were  declared  elected.  For  this  purpose 
6,320  votes  were  cast  —  more  than  twice  the  number  of  legal 
voters. 

Foreign  affairs  other  than  Spain's  unfriendly  activities 
also  had  a  share  in  distracting  attention.  The  United  States 
paid  Mexico  ten  million  dollars  to  be  free  of  the  Guadalupe 
Hidalgo  obligation  to  defend  the  Mexican  frontier  against 
the  Indians. 

My  first  experience  after  I  was  elected  City  Attorney,  was 
to  prosecute  persons  charged  with  violating  the  ordinances 


16       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

prohibiting  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  One  of  my 
preceptors,  the  Hon.  Benjamin  S.  Edwards,  was  a  very 
strong  and  earnest  temperance  man.  He  volunteered  to 
assist  me  in  the  prosecution  of  what  we  called  "liquor  cases." 
The  fact  is  that  for  a  time  he  took  charge  of  the  cases,  and  I 
assisted  him.  Life  was  made  a  burden  to  violators  of  liquor 
ordinances  that  year  in  Springfield. 

The  following  year,  1856,  was  a  Presidential  year.  I 
was  chosen  as  an  elector  on  what  was  called  the  "Fillmore 
Ticket."  I  did  not  at  that  time  believe  very  strongly  in 
Fremont  for  President.  During  the  same  year,  I  was 
nominated  as  a  candidate  for  the  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  Illinois  Legislature,  and  was  supported  by  both  the 
Fillmore  party  and  the  Free-soil  party  and  thus  elected. 

The  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Legislature  of  1856 
was  so  close  that  if  all  the  members  who  had  not  been  elected 
as  Democrats  united,  they  had  one  majority.  If  any  one 
of  them  went  to  the  Democrats,  the  Democrats  would  have 
the  control.  One  of  the  men  elected  on  the  Fillmore  ticket 
went  over,  thus  giving  the  Democracy  the  coveted  one  neces 
sary.  The  Republicans,  or  as  they  were  then  called,  Free- 
soilers,  attempted  to  organize  the  House  by  recognizing  the 
clerk  of  the  previous  House,  who  was  a  Free-soiler,  it  then 
being  the  custom  to  have  the  clerk  call  the  House  to  order 
and  preside  until  a  temporary  organization  was  perfected. 
The  Democrats  refused  to  recognize  the  clerk  whom  the  op 
position  recognized.  The  Democrats  declared  by  vote  the 
election  of  a  temporary  chairman,  nominated  and  elected  a 
sergeant-at-arms  and  a  deputy,  and  ordered  the  two  latter 
officers  to  carry  the  clerk  out  of  the  hall;  which  was  promptly 
done  at  the  expense  of  a  good  suit  of  clothes  to  the  clerk, 
who  departed  reluctantly.  This  was  my  first  experience  in 
legislation. 


SHELBY    M.  CULLOM 

While  a  law  student 


CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD       17 

A  careful  reading  of  the  annals  of  the  State  of  Illinois 
will  show  that  this  incident  is  by  no  means  unique  in  its 
history. 

To  go  back  a  few  years,  when  Edward  Coles,  who  had 
been  private  secretary  to  President  Madison,  was  elected 
Governor,  it  was  by  a  mere  plurality  vote  over  his  highest 
competitor,  and  —  to  use  the  language  of  former  Governor 
Ford  —  he  was  so  unfortunate  as  to  have  a  majority  of  the 
Legislature  against  him  during  his  whole  term  of  service. 
The  election  had  taken  place  soon  after  the  settlement  of  the 
Missouri  question.  The  Illinois  Senators  had  voted  for  the 
admission  of  Missouri  as  a  Slave  State,  while  her  only  Rep 
resentative  in  the  Lower  House  voted  against  it.  This  all 
helped  to  keep  alive  some  questions  for  or  against  the  intro 
duction  of  slavery. 

About  this  time,  also,  a  tide  of  immigrants  was  pouring 
into  Missouri  through  Illinois,  from  Virginia  and  Kentucky. 
In  the  Fall  of  the  year,  every  great  road  was  crowded  with 
them,  all  bound  for  Missouri,  with  their  money  and  long 
trains  of  teams  and  negroes.  These  were  the  most  wealthy 
and  best  educated  immigrants  from  the  Slave  States.  Many 
people  who  had  land  and  farms  to  sell,  looked  upon  the 
good  fortune  of  Missouri  with  envy;  whilst  the  lordly  im 
migrant,  as  he  passed  along  with  his  money  and  droves  of 
negroes,  took  a  malicious  pleasure  in  increasing  it  by  pre 
tending  to  regret  the  short-sighted  policy  of  Illinois,  which 
excluded  him  from  settlement,  and  from  purchasing  and 
holding  lands. 

In  this  mode  a  desire  to  make  Illinois  a  Slave  State  be 
came  quite  prevalent.  Many  persons  had  voted  for  Brown 
or  Phillips  with  this  view,  whilst  the  friends  of  a  Free  State 
had  rallied  almost  in  a  body  for  Coles. 

Notwithstanding  the  defeat  of  the  Democrats  at  this  elec- 


18      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tion,  they  were  not  annihilated.  They  had  been  beaten  for 
Governor  only  by  a  division  in  their  own  ranks,  whilst  they 
had  elected  a  large  majority  of  each  House  of  the  Assembly, 
and  were  determined  to  make  a  vigorous  effort  to  carry  their 
measure  at  the  session  of  the  Legislature  to  be  held  in 
1822-23.  Governor  Coles,  in  his  first  message,  recom 
mended  the  emancipation  of  the  French  slaves.  This  served 
as  the  spark  to  kindle  into  activity  all  the  elements  in  favor 
of  slavery. 

Slavery  could  not  be  introduced,  nor  was  it  believed  that 
the  French  slaves  could  be  emancipated,  without  an  amend 
ment  to  the  Constitution;  the  Constitution  could  not  be 
amended  without  a  new  convention,  to  obtain  which  two- 
thirds  of  each  branch  of  the  Legislature  had  to  concur  in 
recommending  it  to  the  people;  and  the  voters,  at  the  next 
election,  had  to  sanction  it  by  a  majority  of  all  the  votes 
given  for  members  of  the  Legislature. 

When  the  Legislature  assembled,  it  was  found  that  the 
Senate  contained  the  requisite  two-thirds  majority;  but  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  by  deciding  a  contested  elec 
tion  in  favor  of  one  of  the  candidates,  the  Slave  party  would 
have  one  more  than  two- thirds,  while  by  deciding  in  favor 
of  the  other,  they  would  lack  one  vote  of  having  the  ma 
jority.  These  two  candidates  were  John  Shaw  and  Nicholas 
Hanson,  who  claimed  to  represent  the  County  of  Pike,  which 
then  included  all  the  military  tract  and  all  the  country  north 
of  the  Illinois  River  to  the  northern  limits  of  the  State. 

The  leaders  of  the  Slave  party  were  anxious  to  reelect 
Jesse  B.  Thomas  to  the  United  States  Senate.  Hanson 
would  vote  for  him,  but  Shaw  would  not;  Shaw  would  vote 
for  the  convention,  but  Hanson  would  not.  The  party  had 
use  for  both  of  them,  and  they  determined  to  use  them  both, 
one  after  the  other.  For  this  purpose,  they  first  decided  in 


CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD       19 

favor  of  Hanson,  admitted  him  to  a  seat,  and  with  his  vote 
elected  their  United  States  Senator;  and  then,  toward  the 
close  of  the  session,  with  mere  brute  force,  and  in  the  most 
barefaced  manner,  they  reconsidered  their  former  vote, 
turned  Hanson  out  of  his  seat,  and  decided  in  favor  of 
Shaw,  and  with  his  vote  carried  their  resolution  for  a  con 
vention. 

There  immediately  resulted  a  very  fierce  contest  before 
the  people,  characterized  by  lavish  detraction  and  personal 
abuse  —  one  of  the  most  bitter,  prolonged,  and  memorable  in 
the  history  of  the  State  —  and  the  question  of  making 
Illinois  permanently  a  Slave  State  was  put  to  rest  by  a 
majority  of  about  two  thousand  votes.  The  census  of  1850 
was  the  first  that  enumerated  no  slaves  in  our  State. 

In  this  connection  I  cannot  avoid  giving  a  little  account  of 
Frederick  Adolphus  Hubbard,  who  was  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor  when  Coles  was  Governor.  Hubbard  seemed  to  be  a 
very  ignorant  man,  but  ambitious  to  become  Governor  of 
the  State,  or  to  attain  some  other  position  that  would  give 
him  reputation. 

"It  is  related  of  him  that  while  engaged  in  the  trial  of  a  lawsuit, 
involving  the  title  to  a  certain  mill  owned  by  Joseph  Duncan  [who  after 
wards  became  Governor],  the  opposing  counsel,  David  J.  Baker,  then 
recently  from  New  England,  had  quoted  from  Johnson's  New  York 
Reports  a  case  strongly  against  Hubbard's  side.  Reading  reports  of 
the  decisions  of  courts  before  juries  was  a  new  thing  in  those  days; 
and  Hubbard,  to  evade  the  force  of  the  authority  as  a  precedent,  coolly 
informed  the  jury  that  Johnson  was  a  Yankee  clock-peddler,  who  had 
been  perambulating  up  and  down  the  country  gathering  up  rumors  and 
floating  stories  against  the  people  of  the  West,  and  had  them  published 
in  a  book  under  the  name  of  'Johnson's  Reports.'  He  indignantly  re 
pudiated  the  book  as  authority  in  Illinois,  and  clinched  the  argument 
by  adding:  'Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  I  am  sure  you  will  not  believe 


20      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

anything  that  comes   from  that  source;  and  besides  that,  what  did  this 
Johnson  know  about  Duncan's  mill  anyhow?  '  "  x 

Hubbard,  in  1826,  became  a  candidate  for  Governor  of 
Illinois.  He  canvassed  the  State,  and  the  following  is  a 
sample  of  his  speeches,  recorded  by  Ford : 

"Fellow-citizens,  I  offer  myself  as  a  candidate  before  you  for  the  of 
fice  of  Governor.  I  do  not  pretend  to  be  a  man  of  extraordinary  tal 
ents,  nor  do  I  claim  to  be  equal  to  Julius  Caesar  or  Napoleon  Bona 
parte,  nor  yet  to  be  as  great  a  man  as  my  opponent,  Governor  Edwards. 
Nevertheless  I  think  I  can  govern  you  pretty  well.  I  do  not  think  it 
will  require  a  very  extraordinary  smart  man  to  govern  you;  for  to  tell 
you  the  truth,  fellow-citizens,  I  do  not  believe  you  will  be  very  hard  to 
govern,  nohow."  2 

In  1825,  Governor  Coles  notified  Lieutenant-Governor 
Hubbard  that  he  had  occasion  to  leave  the  State  for  a  time 
and  required  the  latter  to  take  charge  of  affairs.  Hubbard 
did  so,  and  when  Governor  Coles  returned  Hubbard  de 
clined  to  give  up  the  office,  asserting  that  the  Governor  had 
vacated  it.  He  based  his  contention  upon  that  clause  of  the 
Constitution  which  provided  that  the  Lieutenant-Governor 
should  exercise  all  the  power  and  authority  appertaining 
to  the  office  of  Governor,  in  case  of  the  latter's  absence  from 
the  State,  until  the  time  provided  by  the  Constitution 
for  the  election  of  Governor  should  arrive.  He  claimed  that 
the  Governor  had  vacated  the  office  until  the  time  of  the 
election  of  a  new  Governor,  and  declined  to  surrender.  The 
result  was,  the  Governor  had  to  get  a  decision  of  the  Su 
preme  Court,  which  was  to  the  effect  that  there  was  no 
ground  on  which  to  award  the  writ.  Coles  was  obliged  to 
submit,  but  not  until  he  had  appealed  to  the  Legislature, 
where  his  contention  was  equally  unsuccessful. 

At  one  time,  after  repeated  and  annoying  application, 

i  Moses,  page  334.  2  Ford,  page  61. 


CITY  ATTORNEY  AT  SPRINGFIELD       21 

Hubbard  obtained  from  Governor  Edwards  what  he  had 
reason  to  believe  was  a  recommendation  for  a  certain  office. 
He  became  a  little  suspicious  that  the  letter  was  not 
very  strong  in  his  behalf,  and  in  speaking  of  it  afterwards, 
in  his  lisping  manner,  said:  "Contrary  to  the  uthage  amongst 
gentlemen,  he  thealed  it  up;  and  contrary  to  the  uthage 
amongst  gentlemen,  I  broke  it  open ;  and  what  do  you  think 
I  found?  Instead  of  recommending  me,  the  old  rathcal 
abuthed  me  like  a  pickpocket." 


CHAPTER  III 

ELECTION   TO  THE   ILLINOIS   LEGISLATURE!    LINCOLN-DOUGLAS 

DEBATES 

1856  TO  1858 

IN  the  year  1856  I  had  rather  unusual  experiences  of  both 
victory  and  defeat  in  one  and  the  same  political  cam 
paign.  As  candidate  for  the  Legislature  I  won  out,  being 
elected;  as  the  chosen  elector  on  the  Fillmore  ticket,  I  went 
down  in  the  party's  defeat.  The  Whig  party  was  in  its  ex 
piring  days,  and  what  was  called  the  "Know-Nothing" 
party  was  apparently  a  temporary  substitute  for  it.  Fill- 
more  carried  one  solitary  State  —  Maryland.  Buchanan 
was  elected  by  quite  a  large  majority  over  both  Fremont  and 
Fillmore  combined. 

The  administration  of  President  Buchanan  has  been  so 
frequently  and  fully  described  that  there  is  little,  if  any 
thing,  new  to  say  about  it;  but  such  were  the  fearful  re 
sponsibilities  incurred  by  it  for  the  subsequent  bloodshed,  that 
its  shortcomings  cannot  be  entirely  ignored  in  the  intelligible 
presentation  of  the  course  of  events  which  gave  direction  to 
my  observations  and  activities. 

The  campaign  of  1856  had  been  one  of  the  most  exciting 
and  hotly  contested  ever  fought  in  the  State.  The  only 
hope  the  Democrats  had  of  success  was  in  the  division  of 
their  opponents  and  in  preventing  their  fusion.  Their 
denunciations  of  abolitionists  and  "Black  Republicans,"  as 
they  termed  their  antagonists,  were  without  bounds.  But 

22 


ELECTION  TO  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE     23 

here  and  there  some  one  would  be  called  to  account,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  late  John  M.  Palmer,  since  distinguished  in  war 
and  peace,  and  some  years  ago  candidate  of  the  Gold  Demo 
crats  for  the  Presidency. 

Between  him  and  Major  Harris,  then  running  for  Con 
gress  in  his  district,  there  had  been  considerable  ill-feeling. 
The  major  had  written  a  letter  to  be  read  at  a  Democratic 
meeting  at  which  Palmer  was  present.  It  was  very  abusive 
of  the  Republicans,  and  Palmer  rising,  remarked  that  the 
author  would  not  dare  make  such  charges  to  the  face  of 
any  honest  man.  Harris,  as  related  by  the  historian  Moses, 
hearing  of  this,  announced  that  he  would  resent  it  at  the 
first  opportunity.  This  Palmer  soon  gave  him  by  attend 
ing  one  of  his  meetings.  The  major  in  the  course  of  his 
remarks  indulged  in  the  most  vituperative  language  against 
abolitionists,  calling  them  disturbers  of  the  peace,  incen 
diaries,  and  falsifiers ;  and  at  length,  turning  to  Palmer  and 
pointing  his  finger  at  him,  said,  "I  mean  you,  sir!"  Palmer 
rising  to  his  feet,  instantly  replied,  "Well,  sir,  if  you  apply 
that  language  to  me  you  are  a  dastardly  liar!"  And  draw 
ing  a  pistol,  he  started  toward  the  speaker's  stand.  "Now, 
sir,"  he  continued,  "when  you  get  through,  I  propose  to  re 
ply  to  you."  The  major  had  not  anticipated  this  turn  of 
affairs,  but  prudently  kept  his  temper  and  finished  his 
speech.  Then  Palmer  arose  and,  laying  his  weapon  be 
fore  him,  cocked,  proceeded  to  give  the  Democratic  party 
such  a  castigation  as  none  of  those  present  had  ever  heard 
before. 

It  was  in  the  campaign  of  1856  that  I  first  began  to  make 
political  speeches.  James  H.  Matheny,  who  was  then  our 
circuit  clerk,  accompanied  me  to  several  meetings  where  we 
both  delivered  addresses.  He  was  an  old  Whig  inclined  to 
ward  Democracy,  and  I  was  a  Whig  inclined  toward  Repub- 


24       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

licanism.  The  result  was  I  made  Republican  speeches, 
while  Judge  Matheny  made  Democratic  speeches. 

Our  first  meeting  away  from  home  was  at  Petersburg, 
Menard  County.  Being  a  candidate  for  elector  on  the  Fill- 
more  ticket,  I  made  my  first  away-f  rom-home  speech,  which 
I  thought  was  a  pretty  good  Republican  speech.  Matheny 
followed  me  with  a  hot  Democratic  speech,  attacking 
especially  Judge  Trumbull,  then  our  United  States  Senator. 
I  remained  pretty  steadily  in  %the  campaign  of  that  year, 
making  about  the  same  character  of  speech  wherever  I  went. 

Fillmore  was  very  popular  in  Central  Illinois,  where  the 
Whig  party  also  had  quite  a  large  following  during  its 
palmy  days,  but  he  did  not  receive  votes  enough  to  come 
anywhere  near  carrying  the  State.  Sangamon,  my  home 
county,  and  Tazewell  County,  where  I  was  brought  up,  both 
gave  their  majority  votes  for  Fillmore. 

The  Hon.  John  T.  Stuart  and  his  partner,  the  Hon.  B. 
S.  Edwards,  with  whom  I  studied  law,  besides  being  able 
lawyers  and  first-class  men,  were  both  Whigs ;  Mr.  Stuart  es 
pecially  took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign.  The  latter  was 
invited  to  attend  what  was  called  a  Fillmore  meeting  at  Shel- 
byville,  several  counties  away  from  Sangamon.  It  so  hap 
pened  that  he  could  not  go,  and  the  people  of  Shelbyville 
telegraphed  for  me.  I  went,  and  it  turned  out  to  be  a  com 
bined  Fremont,  Buchanan,  and  Fillmore  meeting  —  at  least, 
the  three  meetings  there  were  held  all  on  the  same  day. 

The  Fillmore  camp  gathered  its  forces  out  in  the  woods 
until  about  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  Buchanan  and 
Fremont  crowds  then  marched  in,  informing  the  first-comers 
that  they  regarded  their  right  to  have  the  first  meeting  pre 
eminent.  An  agreement  was  arrived  at  after  some  little 
wrangling,  and  old  General  Thornton  was  chosen  to  preside. 
He  determined  that,  as  I  was  not  only  a  young  man  but  the 


ELECTION  TO  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE     25 

farthest  from  home,  I  should  make  the  first  speech  —  an  ar 
rangement  which  suited  me  very  well. 

I  made  my  speech,  as  good  a  one  as  I  could,  and  in  closing, 
somewhat  hurriedly  announced  that  I  was  obliged  to  leave  for 
home,  much  as  I  might  wish  to  remain  with  them  to  the  close 
of  the  meeting.  The  result  was  that  most  of  the  Fillmore 
people  followed  me  away  and  came  nearly  breaking  up  the 
whole  performance.  I  urged  them  to  go  back  and  listen 
to  the  other  speakers;  but  they  declined  to  do  so  until  I  had 
gotten  off  for  home.  It  was  my  first  venture  at  speech- 
making  away  from  home  on  national  issues. 

I  worked  and  voted  for  Fillmore  because  I  had  a  very 
high  opinion  of  him  as  a  good  man,  and  did  not  then  think 
very  much  of  Fremont  as  a  proper  candidate  for  the  Presi 
dency.  Subsequently  Fremont  became  better  known,  and 
occupied  a  high  place  in  the  estimation  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  as  a  gallant  soldier  and  a  statesman,  enjoy 
ing  the  unique  honor  of  having  been  the  first  candidate  of 
the  Republican  party  for  President. 

I  have  taken  an  active  part  in  every  campaign  since  1856, 
excepting  when  poor  health  prevented  a  regular  speaking 
campaign. 

The  animosities  of  the  campaign  of  1856  were  carried  into 
the  Legislature  and  kept  alive  in  the  House  during  the  en 
tire  session.  Governor  BisselFs  inaugural  address  was  a 
dignified  State  paper  in  which  he  referred  to  the  adminis 
tration  of  his  predecessor  in  highly  complimentary  terms. 
He  concurred  in  all  his  recommendations,  but  suggested  no 
measures  of  his  own.  Although  he  had  commented  briefly 
upon  the  Kansas-Nebraska  controversy,  and  in  mild  terms, 
his  remarks  stirred  the  ire  of  the  Democrats.  Upon  the  mo 
tion  to  print  the  address,  a  virulent  attack  was  made  upon 
him,  led,  strange  to  say,  by  John  A.  Logan,  afterwards  the 


26      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

foremost  volunteer  general  of  the  Union,  and  a  Republican 
of  Republicans.  The  rancor  of  the  Democrats  against 
Governor  Bissell,  who  at  that  time  was  a  physical  wreck 
from  a  stroke  of  paralysis,  though  mentally  sound,  was 
largely  due  to  their  recollection  of  the  fearless  manner  in 
which  he  had  responded,  some  years  before,  to  a  challenge 
given  him  by  Jefferson  Davis  to  a  duel.  That  episode  has 
long  since  become  historic,  and  I  need  not  enlarge  upon  it 
here. 

As  was  the  political  temper  in  the  State  of  Illinois,  so 
was  it,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree,  throughout  the  entire 
Nation. 

Buchanan's  first  message  repeated  the  assurance  that  the 
discussion  of  slavery  had  come  to  an  end.  The  clergy  were 
criticised  for  fomenting  prevalent  disturbances.  The  Presi 
dent  declared  in  favor  of  the  admission  of  Kansas,  with  a 
Constitution  agreeable  to  a  majority  of  the  settlers.  He 
also  referred  to  an  impending  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  with  which  he  had  been  made  acquainted,  and  asked 
acquiescence  in  it.  This  was  Judge  Taney's  decision  in  the 
Dred  Scott  case,  rendered  two  days  after  Buchanan's  inau 
guration. 

An  action  had  been  begun  in  the  Circuit  Court  in  Mis 
souri  by  Scott,  a  negro,  for  the  freedom  of  himself  and 
children.  He  claimed  that  he  had  been  removed  by  his 
master  in  1834  to  Illinois,  a  Free  State,  and  afterwards 
taken  into  territory  north  of  the  compromise  line.  San- 
ford,  his  master,  replied  that  Scott  was  not  a  citizen  of  Mis 
souri,  and  could  not  bring  an  action,  and  that  he  and  his 
children  were  Sanford's  slaves.  The  lower  courts  differed, 
and  the  case  was  twice  argued.  The  decision  nullified  the 
Missouri  restriction,  or,  indeed,  any  restriction  by  Congress 
on  slavery  in  the  Territories.  Chief- Justice  Taney  said: 


ELECTION  TO  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE     27 

"The  question  is  whether  the  class  of  persons  (negroes)  compose  a 
portion  of  the  people,  and  are  constituent  members  of  this  sovereignty. 
We  think  they  are  not  included  under  the  word  'citizen*  in  the  Constitu 
tion,  and  can  therefore  claim  none  of  the  rights  and  privileges  of  that 
instrument." 

Negroes,  as  a  race,  were  at  that  time  considered  as  a  sub 
ordinate  and  inferior  class  who  had  been  subjugated  by  the 
dominant  whites,  and  had  no  rights  or  privileges  except 
such  as  those  who  held  the  power  and  the  government  might 
choose  to  grant  them.  They  had  for  more  than  a  century 
been  regarded  as  beings  of  an  inferior  grade  —  so  far  infe 
rior  that  they  possessed  no  rights  which  the  white  man  was 
bound  to  respect;  and  the  negro  might  justly  and  lawfully 
be  reduced  to  slavery  for  his  (the  white  man's)  benefit. 
The  negro  race  by  common  consent  had  been  excluded  from 
civilized  governments  and  the  family  of  nations,  and 
doomed  to  slavery.  The  unhappy  black  race  was  separated 
from  the  whites  by  indelible  marks  long  before  established, 
and  was  never  thought  of  or  spoken  of  except  as  property. 

The  Chief-Justice  further  annulled  the  Missouri  restric 
tion,  by  asserting  that  "the  act  of  Congress  which  prohibited 
a  citizen  from  holding  property  of  this  kind  north  of  the 
line  therein  mentioned  is  not  warranted  by  the  Constitution, 
and  is  therefore  void."  Benton  said  that  it  was  "no  longer 
the  exception,  with  freedom  the  rule;  but  slavery  was  the 
rule,  with  freedom  the  exception." 

It  was  a  year  of  financial  distress  in  America,  which  re 
called  the  hard  times  of  twenty  years  before.  The  United 
States  treasury  was  empty. 

Early  in  this  year  (1856)  a  Legislature  had  met  at  To- 
peka,  Kansas,  and  was  immediately  dissolved  by  the  United 
States  marshals.  A  Territorial  Legislature  also  met  at 
Lecompton  and  provided  for  a  State  Constitution.  The 


28      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

people  of  Kansas  utterly  refused  to  recognize  the  latter  body 
which  had  been  chosen  by  the  Missouri  invaders,  and  both 
parties  continued  to  hold  their  elections. 

Thus  it  may  be  seen  that  these  episodes  were  the  culmina 
tion  of  a  long  series  of  events  leading  to  a  new  alignment 
of  the  country's  political  forces.  The  Republican  party 
was  the  child  of  this  ferment  of  unrest.  The  formation  of 
a  new  political  party,  or  the  regeneration  of  an  old  one,  is 
always  due  to  events,  and  not  to  the  schemes  and  purposes 
of  men  except  as  events  sometimes  originate  in  such  pur 
poses  and  schemes.  In  this  case  the  steps  in  the  course  of 
events  which  had  rendered  the  formation  of  an  anti-slavery 
party  inevitable  were :  the  pro-slavery  provisions  of  the  Con 
stitution,  the  foreign  slave  trade,  the  acquisition  of  the  Ter 
ritory  of  Louisiana,  the  invention  of  the  cotton-gin  and  its 
effects,  the  Missouri  Compromise,  the  nullification  scheme 
of  South  Carolina,  the  colonization  and  annexation  of 
Texas,  the  Mexican  War,  the  contest  over  the  admission  of 
California,  the  Compromise  Measure  of  1850,  and  finally, 
the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  in  1854. 

The  name  of  the  party  was  an  incident  only,  and  not  an 
essential  or  very  important  incident;  its  principles  and  pur 
poses  were  the  vital  facts.  When  events  demand  a  new 
party,  or  the  reorganization  of  an  old  one,  all  resistance  is 
usually  borne  down  speedily.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  a 
wasteful  exhibition  of  human  power  to  attempt  the  creation 
of  a  new  party  by  the  force  of  combined  will  and  resolutions 
formulated  in  public  meetings.  Abraham  Lincoln's  greater 
experience  or  keener  penetration,  or  both,  guided  him  at 
the  outset  of  the  realignments  on  political  issues,  and  at  the 
opening  of  the  Congressional  campaign  of  1858,  I  followed 
him  firmly  and  without  mental  reservation  into  the  ranks  of 
the  Republican  party. 


ELECTION  TO  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE     29 

Hence  it  was  that  I  was  present  on  that  historic  occasion 
when  the  Republican  party  of  the  State  of  Illinois  held  a 
convention  at  Springfield,  June  17  of  the  year  named,  and 
nominated  Lincoln  for  the  seat  in  the  United  States  Senate, 
then  held  by  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  who  at  that  time  was 
usually  affectionately  referred  to  by  his  partisan  followers 
as  "The  Little  Giant."  This  nomination  was  anticipated, 
and  Mr.  Lincoln  had  prepared  a  speech,  which  he  then  de 
livered,  in  which  he  set  forth,  in  a  manner  now  universally 
recognized  as  masterly,  the  doctrines  of  the  Republican 
party.  He  arraigned  the  administration  of  Mr.  Buchanan 
and  denounced  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  un 
der  the  lead  of  Senator  Douglas.  In  that  speech  he  made 
the  declaration,  which  I  remember  as  clearly  as  though 
an  event  of  yesterday,  then  characterized  as  extravagant 
but  long  since  accepted  as  prophetic:  "I  believe  this 
Government  cannot  endure  permanently,  half  slave  and 
half  free." 

That  address  inaugurated  a  discussion  which  has  no  ex 
act  parallel  in  history  —  certainly  no  equal  in  American 
political  history.  It  introduced  Mr.  Lincoln  to  the  coun 
try  at  large,  and  prepared  the  way  for  his  nomination  to 
the  Presidency  two  years  later.  On  the  declaration  above 
quoted  Mr.  Douglas  based  many  arguments,  in  vain  at 
tempts  to  prove  that  Mr.  Lincoln  was  a  disunionist. 

During  this  period  Douglas  addressed  an  enthusiastic 
assemblage  at  Chicago,  and  in  the  course  of  his  speech  ad 
verted  to  the  arraignment  of  himself  by  Mr.  Lincoln.  He 
took  direct  issue  with  that  gentleman  on  his  proposition  that, 
as  to  Freedom  and  Slavery,  "the  Union  will  become  all  one 
thing  or  all  the  other,"  and  maintained  strenuously  that  "it  is 
neither  desirable  nor  possible  that  there  should  be  uniformity 


30      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

in  the  local  institutions  and  domestic  regulations  of  the  dif 
ferent  States  of  this  Union." 

An  announcement  that  Mr.  Lincoln  would  reply  to  Mr. 
Douglas  on  the  following  evening  brought  out  another  as 
semblage,  July  10,  which  was  awakened,  before  the  speaker 
had  concluded,  to  an  enthusiasm  at  least  equal  to  that  which 
the  eloquence  of  Douglas  had  aroused. 

The  issues  involved  in  this  famous  series  of  debates  are 
too  familiar  to  all  students  of  our  Nation's  political  history 
to  be  considered  at  length  in  these  pages.  Mr.  Lincoln 
analyzed  and  answered  the  various  arguments  advanced  by 
Mr.  Douglas  the  evening  before;  and  the  closing  para 
graphs  of  his  reply  to  the  insistent  reminders  "that  this 
Government  was  made  for  white  men,"  were  memorable: 

"Those  arguments  that  are  made,  that  the  inferior  race  are  to  be 
treated  with  as  much  allowance  as  they  are  capable  of  enjoying;  that 
as  much  is  to  be  done  for  them  as  their  conditions  will  allow.  What  are 
these  arguments?  They  are  the  arguments  that  kings  have  made  for 
enslaving  the  people  in  all  ages  of  the  world.  You  will  find  that  all 
the  arguments  in  favor  of  kingcraft  were  of  this  class;  they  always 
bestrode  the  necks  of  the  people,  not  that  they  wanted  to  do  it,  but 
because  the  people  were  better  off  for  being  ridden.  That  is  their 
argument,  and  this  argument  of  the  Judge  is  the  same  old  serpent  that 
says:  'You  work,  and  I  eat;  you  toil,  and  I  will  enjoy  the  fruits  of  it/  " 

Six  days  thereafter,  July  16,  Senator  Douglas  in  a  great 
speech  again  tried  to  break  the  force  of  his  opponent's  facts 
and  logic.  This  was  at  Bloomington,  and  Mr.  Lincoln  was 
again  a  careful  listener.  On  the  evening  following,  July 
17,  at  Springfield,  before  an  enthusiastic  audience,  he  pro 
ceeded  to  dissect  the  matters  so  plausibly  presented. 

At  the  same  hour  Douglas  was  addressing  a  Springfield 
audience  of  his  own,  ridiculing  especially  Mr.  Lincoln's  al 
leged  attitude  toward  the  Supreme  Court. 


ELECTION  TO  ILLINOIS  LEGISLATURE     31 

Contrasting  the  disadvantages  under  which,  by  reason  of 
an  unfair  apportionment  of  State  Legislature  representa 
tion  and  otherwise,  the  Republicans  labored  in  that  cam 
paign,  Mr.  Lincoln  on  that  occasion  said  in  the  course  of 
his  talk: 

"Senator  Douglas  is  of  world-wide  renown.  All  the  anxious  poli 
ticians  of  his  party,  or  who  have  been  of  his  party  for  years  past,  have 
been  looking  upon  him  as  certainly,  at  no  distant  day,  to  be  the  President 
of  the  United  States.  They  have  seen  in  his  round,  jolly,  fruitful  face, 
post-offices,  land-offices,  marshalships,  and  cabinet  appointments,  charge- 
ships  and  foreign  missions,  bursting  and  sprouting  out  in  wonderful 
exuberance,  ready  to  be  laid  hold  of  by  their  greedy  hands.  And  as 
they  have  been  gazing  upon  this  attractive  picture  so  long,  they  cannot, 
in  the  little  distraction  that  has  taken  place  in  the  party,  bring  them 
selves  to  give  up  the  charming  hope;  but  with  greedier  anxiety  they 
rush  about  him,  sustain  him,  and  give  him  marches,  triumphal  entries, 
and  receptions,  beyond  what  even  in  the  days  of  his  highest  prosperity 
they  could  have  brought  about  in  his  favor.  On  the  contrary,  nobody 
has  ever  expected  me  to  be  President.  In  my  poor,  lean,  lank  face,  no 
body  has  ever  seen  that  any  cabbages  were  sprouting  out/' 

He  affirmed  that  Popular  Sovereignty,  "the  great  sta 
ple"  of  the  Douglas  campaign,  was  "the  most  arrant  Quix 
otism  that  was  ever  enacted  before  a  community." 

As  a  result  of  these  preliminary  speeches  of  the  Congres 
sional  campaign  it  was  generally  conceded  that,  at  last,  the 
"Little  Giant"  had  met  his  match,  and  the  intellectual  and 
political  appetites  of  the  public  called  for  more.  In  recog 
nition  of  this  demand,  Mr.  Lincoln  opened  a  correspondence 
which  led  to  an  agreement  with  Mr.  Douglas  for  a  series  of 
joint  discussions,  seven  in  number,  on  fixed  dates  in  August, 
September,  and  October.  Alternately  they  were,  in  suc 
cession,  to  open  the  discussion  and  speak  for  an  hour,  with 
another  half-hour  at  the  close  after  the  other  had  spoken 
for  an  hour  and  a  half  continuously.  My  friend  and  school- 


32      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

mate,  the  late  Mr.  R.  R.  Hitt,  an  efficient  stenographer, 
was  employed  to  report  the  entire  series,  and  thus  we  have 
a  full  record  of  the  most  remarkable  debate,  viewed  from 
all  points,  that  has  ever  occurred  in  American  history  — 
possibly  without  a  parallel  in  the  world's  history.  Vast  as 
semblages  gathered  from  far  and  near  and  listened  with 
breathless  attention  to  these  absorbingly  interesting  discus 
sions. 

Notwithstanding  the  intense  partisan  feeling  that  was 
evoked,  the  discussion  proceeded  amidst  surroundings  char 
acterized  by  the  utmost  decorum.  The  people  evidently  felt 
that  the  greatest  of  all  political  principles,  that  of  human 
liberty  itself,  was  hanging  on  the  issue  of  this  great  political 
contest  between  intellectual  giants,  thus  openly  waged  be 
fore  the  world.  They  accordingly  rose  to  the  dignity  and 
solemnity  of  the  occasion,  as  has  been  well  said  by  one  who 
was  then  a  zealous  follower  of  Douglas,  vindicating  by  their 
very  example  the  sacredness  with  which  the  right  of  free 
speech  should  be  regarded  at  all  times  and  everywhere. 

I  have  elsewhere  described  the  disappointment  I  person 
ally  felt  at  the  result,  when  the  election  returns  came  in. 
Although  the  popular  vote  stood  125,698  for  Lincoln  to 
121,130  for  Douglas  —  showing  a  victory  for  Lincoln 
among  the  people  —  yet  enough  Douglas  Democrats  were 
elected  to  the  Legislature,  when  added  to  those  of  his  friends 
in  the  Illinois  Senate  elected  two  years  before  and  held  over, 
to  give  him  fifty-four  members  of  both  branches  of  the  Legis 
lature  on  joint  ballot,  against  forty-six  for  Mr.  Lincoln. 


CHAPTER  IV 

OTHER   DISTINGUISHED    CHARACTERS   OF   THAT   DAY 
1858   AND    1859 

MORE  than  four  months  had  elapsed  since  Lincoln's 
epoch-marking  speech  at  Springfield  had  brought 
on  his  great  discussion  with  Douglas,  when  on  Octo 
ber  20,  1858,  Governor  Seward  at  Rochester,  New  York, 
intensified  the  political  inflammation  of  the  times  by  saying 
in  a  notable  speech: 

"These  antagonistic  systems  (free  labor  and  slave  labor)  are  con 
tinually  coming  close  in  contact.  It  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  between 
opposing  and  enduring  forces;  and  it  means  that  the  United  States  must 
and  will,  sooner  or  later,  become  either  an  entirely  slave-holding  or  en 
tirely  a  free-labor  nation." 

A  book  written  by  a  young  Southerner,  "The  Impending 
Crisis  in  the  South  —  How  to  Meet  It,"  was  recommended 
in  a  circular  signed  by  a  large  number  of  the  Republican 
Congressmen,  and  thus  given  a  vogue  and  weight  out  of 
all  proportion  to  the  standing  of  the  author,  whose  recent 
death  under  tragic  circumstances  at  an  advanced  age  has 
drawn  the  name  of  Hinton  Rowan  Helper  for  a  brief  hour 
from  its  long  obscurity. 

"Dred,  a  Tale  of  the  Dismal  Swamp,"  by  the  author  of 
"Uncle  Tom's  Cabin,"  served,  if  such  service  were  at  all 
needed,  to  keep  fresh  in  all  civilized  lands  the  name  of  Har 
riet  Elizabeth  Beecher  Stowe.  The  British  Museum  has  a 
3  33 


34      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

long  shelf  filled  with  different  translations,  editions,  and 
versions  of  her  greatest  literary  work. 

In  the  month  of  September  Mr.  Lincoln  delivered  a 
speech  at  Cincinnati,  in  reply  to  Mr.  Douglas.  In  that 
speech  he  addressed  himself  to  the  citizens  of  Kentucky,  and 
advocated  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Douglas  to  the  Presi 
dency,  upon  the  ground  that  he  was  more  devoted  to  the 
South  than  were  the  Southern  leaders  themselves,  and  that 
he  was  wiser  in  methods  for  defending  their  rights. 

This  was  a  form  of  attack  which  Douglas  had  not  antici 
pated,  and  which  he  could  neither  resent  nor  answer.  As 
the  event  proved,  the  seed  thus  sown  was  to  bear  fruit 
abundantly  in  results  at  the  ensuing  National  Democratic 
conventions,  and  at  the  Presidential  election  two  years  later. 
Until  June,  Mr.  Lincoln  was  unknown  outside  of  Illinois 
and  Indiana.  Judge  Douglas  had  already  taken  a  high 
place  among  the  able  men  of  his  time  of  national  and  inter 
national  reputation.  In  September,  Lincoln's  character 
was  understood  and  his  ability  was  recognized  in  all  the  non- 
slaveholding  States  of  the  Union.  His  mastery  over  Doug 
las  had  been  complete.  His  logic  was  unanswerable,  his 
ridicule  fatal ;  every  position  taken  by  him  was  defended  suc 
cessfully.  At  the  end  Douglas  had  but  one  recourse.  He 
misstated  Lincoln's  positions,  and  then  assailed  them. 

But  Lincoln  was  ever  on  the  alert  to  expose  his  oppo 
nent's  fallacies,  and  to  hold  up  their  author  to  the  derision 
or  condemnation  of  his  hearers. 

Mr.  Lincoln's  first  fame  rests,  therefore,  on  that  great 
debate.  Judge  Douglas  had  long  been  famous  as  an  ex 
perienced  politician  and  an  exceptionally  skilful  debater. 
As  lawyers  both  ranked  high  in  their  State  at  a  time  when 
the  bar  of  Illinois  could  boast  of  exceptionally  brilliant  and 
able  forensic  talent. 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     35 

As  it  is  my  purpose  to  treat  of  both  these  great  men  in 
some  detail  in  subsequent  pages  of  this  work,  devoting  at 
least  a  full  chapter  to  Mr.  Lincoln,  so  long  my  admired 
and  never  failing  friend,  I  shall  now  proceed  to  give  some 
personal  recollections  concerning  certain  other  of  the  dis 
tinguished  characters  of  that  day,  chiefly  those  connected 
with  the  bar. 

I  knew  Judge  David  Davis  very  well.  He  was  Circuit 
Judge  on  our  State  circuit  for  a  number  of  years,  and  until 
Mr.  Lincoln  became  President,  when  he  was  made  Asso 
ciate  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 
When  a  young  lawyer  Davis  was  a  Whig;  and  my  father, 
being  also  a  Whig,  took  a  great  interest  in  him,  as  he  did 
in  every  young  lawyer  he  knew  who  became  affiliated  with 
that  party.  My  father  thought  himself  justified  in  be 
lieving  that  Davis  would  become  a  power  in  the  land. 
Hence  he  took  up  the  young  man  soon  after  he  had 
settled  in  the  practice  of  the  law  at  Bloomington;  and  I 
have  heard  him  state  that  he  gave  Davis  the  first  case  he 
ever  had  in  Tazewell  County,  by  advising  another  to  employ 
him.  But  he  reenacted,  on  the  less  conspicuous  forum,  the 
distressing  experience  of  failure  of  Disraeli  in  his  first  at 
tempt  to  address  the  English  House  of  Commons.  Davis 
broke  down  in  the  speech  he  had  prepared  to  make,  to  the 
great  mortification  of  my  father,  who  had  exhibited  such 
unusual  pride  and  confidence  as  to  counsel  his  employment 
in  the  case.  Subsequently  Davis  redeemed  himself,  as  did 
Disraeli,  and  became  a  most  prominent  and  successful 
lawyer. 

Among  other  interesting  circumstances  of  his  career  was 
that  of  a  little  claim  he  had  for  a  client  in  Boston  against 
a  merchant  in  Chicago.  He  could  not  collect  the  debt,  ex- 


36      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

cept  by  levying  on  a  tract  of  land  in  Chicago  —  eighty 
acres,  I  think.  Davis  reported  what  he  had  done,  and  his 
client  manifested  dissatisfaction  with  the  result.  He  so 
vigorously  stated  his  disappointment  to  Davis,  that  the  latter 
immediately  redeemed  the  land  by  taking  it  himself  and 
paying  the  amount  of  money  due  the  client.  This  tract 
grew  in  value  with  the  growth  of  Chicago  until  it  became 
worth  a  million  dollars  or  more. 

Judge  Davis  was  a  remarkably  popular  man  on  his  circuit. 
He  was  thoroughly  honest,  and  could  not  endure  a  dishonest 
man  on  the  witness-stand  or  anywhere  else.  I  remember  a 
man  in  Chicago  who  on  one  occasion  filed  a  bill  of  discovery 
for  the  purpose  of  finding  real  estate  that  he  seemed  once 
to  have  had  an  interest  in,  and  which  also  involved  the 
insertion  of  Judge  Davis's  own  name,  since  he  had  himself 
at  one  time  owned  the  tract  of  land  involved.  The  man 
had  lost  his  voice  to  a  considerable  extent,  so  that  he  had 
come  to  be  called  "Whispering  Smith."  He  became  notori 
ous  as  a  successful  collector  of  debts,  where  persons  had 
failed  and  were  unable  to  pay  their  debts.  He  had  filed  in 
this  case  a  bill  of  discovery  consisting  of  thirty  or  forty 
printed  pages  which  included  the  names  of  many  people 
who  had  been  found  to  have  owned  the  real  estate  at  one 
time  or  another,  among  them  being  Judge  Davis.  Dis 
covering  this,  and  being  entirely  innocent  of  any  complicity 
with  the  party  who  had  failed,  the  Judge  denounced  Smith 
in  open  court  for  the  outrage  of  swearing  to  something  he 
did  not  know  anything  about,  and  practically  threw  him  out 
of  court. 

There  was  an  incident  characteristic  of  his  fidelity  to 
friendships  which  I  think  well  worth  relating.  It  occurred 
when  I  was  Governor  of  Illinois.  I  was  invited  by  the 
Agricultural  Society  of  McLean  County  to  deliver  an  ad- 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     37 

dress,  and  went  to  Bloomington  on  the  day  designated.  I 
was  called  upon  by  Judge  Davis,  who  resided  there.  He 
was  a  very  polite  man,  and  asked  me  if  he  could  not  take  me 
out  to  the  fair-ground.  I  told  him  I  would  be  delighted  if 
he  would  do  so.  He  came  for  me  with  his  carriage,  and  on 
our  arrival  at  the  grounds  took  me  to  the  stand,  disregard 
ing  the  prearrangements  of  the  officials  of  the  fair,  and  intro 
duced  me  to  the  audience.  In  doing  so  he  made  a  speech, 
very  complimentary  to  my  father,  but  scarcely  mentioning 
me  at  all  —  not  more  than  to  introduce  me  at  the  end  of 
his  eulogistic  remarks.  Many  of  the  lawyers  of  the  town 
were  present.  I  knew  them  all,  and  they  were  much  amused 
at  this  unusual  style  of  introduction.  And  so  was  I.  I 
knew,  of  course,  that  he  was  a  great  friend  of  my  father, 
and  a  great  friend  of  mine  as  well. 

Judge  Davis  was  elected  to  the  Senate  in  1877  to  succeed 
General  Logan,  and  resigned  his  seat  on  the  bench  to  accept 
the  position.  He  became  quite  fond  of  the  Senate,  and  dur 
ing  his  one  term  there  he  was  elected  president  pro  tempore 
of  the  body  under  somewhat  unusual  conditions.  The 
Senate  at  that  time  was  almost  evenly  divided  between  the 
two  parties.  The  two  senators  from  New  York,  however 
(both  Republicans),  and  Mr.  Aldrich,  of  Rhode  Island, 
had  been  elected  by  their  respective  Legislatures,  but  had 
not  taken  their  seats.  This  gave  the  Democrats  a  temporary 
majority,  and  the  Senate  proceeded  to  elect  Senator  Bayard, 
of  Delaware,  as  its  president  pro  tempore.  Within  the  next 
day  or  two,  however,  the  two  New  York  senators  and  Sen 
ator  Aldrich  were  admitted  to  their  seats;  this  left  a  major 
ity  of  two  for  the  Republicans  if  Davis  acted  with  them,  and 
the  two  parties  tied  if  Davis  acted  with  the  Democrats. 
Under  these  circumstances,  General  Logan,  who  after  being 
out  for  two  years  had  been  reflected  to  the  Senate,  moved  in 


38       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  caucus  that  David  Davis  be  the  Republican  candidate  for 
president  pro  tempore.  Later  he  made  the  motion  in  the 
Senate  itself,  and  Senator  Davis  was  elected,  Senator  Bay 
ard  descending,  amid  general  laughter,  from  the  chair  which 
he  had  occupied  for  but  a  short  time. 

Senator  Davis  was  very  proud  of  the  position  of  president 
pro  tempore.,  which  he  retained  to  the  end  of  his  Senatorial 
term.  He  had  been  acting  quite  independently,  but  seemed 
to  incline  a  little  toward  the  Democrats.  After  he  became 
president  pro  tempore,  while  he  never  announced  himself  a 
Republican,  he  generally  acted  with  the  Republicans. 

I  was  in  the  Senate  the  day  before  Senator  Davis's  term 
expired.  He  was  soliloquizing  to  himself  in  the  intervals 
of  putting  motions  and  attending  to  the  routine  of  his  of 
fice.  He  was  very  fond  of  Senator  Isham  G.  Harris  of 
Tennessee,  and  when  he  had  occasion  to  call  a  senator  to 
the  chair,  generally  it  would  be  Harris.  He  called  Harris 
to  him  while  I  was  there,  and  I  heard  him  say  as  his  friend 
came  up:  "Harris,  Harris!  When  I  get  out  of  here  I  won't 
have  to  listen  to  old  Bayard  any  more!  " 

He  was  a  very  remarkable  man  and  a  friend  of  Lincoln, 
and  Lincoln  was  a  friend  of  his.  I  suppose  that  Davis  did 
as  much  to  secure  Lincoln's  nomination  over  Seward  as  any 
one  man,  although  Judge  Logan  worked  with  equal  zeal. 
But  Davis  knew  more  people  than  did  Judge  Logan,  al 
though  the  latter  was,  in  my  opinion,  the  better  lawyer. 

In  the  days  of  Davis's  judicial  life  on  the  State  bench, 
the  judge  and  the  lawyer  had  a  pretty  large  circuit.  Dav 
is's  circuit  was  composed  of  several  large  counties.  It  was 
the  custom  to  travel  the  circuit,  judge,  lawyers,  and  all,  to 
gether.  At  that  period  there  were  no  railway  facilities 
worth  mentioning,  and  they  had  to  go  by  private  conveyance 
—  wagon  or  carriage  or  on  horseback  as  the  case  might  be. 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     39 

Probably  a  dozen  lawyers  might  go  together,  all  putting 
up  at  the  same  hotel,  and  generally  having  a  good  time  at 
night,  spinning  yarns.  Lincoln  was  a  good  story-teller,  and 
so  was  Davis;  and  the  evenings  were  made  exceedingly 
agreeable  to  all  concerned. 

In.  no  small  measure  as  a  result  of  the  influences  thus  put 
into  operation,  the  lawyers  of  the  period  were  better  quali 
fied  to  get  along  in  life  than  those  of  later  days ;  that  is  to 
say,  for  the  rough-and-tumble  life  they  were  better  able  to 
take  care  of  themselves  than  the  lawyers  of  a  more  recent 
date  have  been,  as  a  general  rule. 

Judg;e  Stephen  T.  Logan  was,  I  think,  the  best  lawyer 
that  I  have  ever  known  in  Illinois.  He  went  to  Illinois  at 
an  early  age  and  lived  there  until  his  death ;  he  had  attained 
the  age  of  a  little  more  than  eighty  years  before  he  died. 
He  was  purely  a  lawyer.  I  think  I  never  knew  another 
lawyer  who  could  so  everlastingly  ruin  a  man  who  under 
took  to  misrepresent  the  truth.  He  seemed  to  understand 
intuitively  whether  a  man  was  trying  to  tell  the  truth  or  was 
lying;  if  the  latter,  his  words  would  so  effectually  be  torn  to 
pieces  that  they  could  be  of  no  earthly  value.  But  he  was 
not  an  adept  as  a  politician.  He  ran  for  Congress  at  one 
time  against  a  man  named  Thomas  L.  Harris,  and  was 
beaten.  He  also  ran  later  for  Judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  was  beaten.  This  defeat  was  not  his  fault,  how 
ever,  as  the  community  was  a  strongly  Democratic  one.  I 
recall  a  story  current  in  those  days,  to  the  effect  that  some 
man  who  had  recently  come  from  the  East  inquired,  while 
talking  with  him,  "By  the  way,  Judge,  didn't  you  run  for 
the  Supreme  Court  last  year?"  In  his  squeaky  voice,  the 
judge  replied,  "No;  I  hardly  walked." 

But  the  judge  was  a  true  man  in  every  respect, —  honest, 


40      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

faithful  to  his  friends,  and  fearless  in  doing  whatever  he 
believed  to  be  right.  He  felt,  I  think,  a  little  bit  disap 
pointed  that  President  Lincoln  did  not  appoint  him  instead 
of  Davis  a  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

I  came  to  Washington  and  saw  Mr.  Lincoln  in  Judge 
Logan's  behalf  without  any  suggestion  that  I  do  so  from 
Logan  or  any  one  else,  but  simply  because  I  believed  that  the 
President  ought  to  appoint  him  on  the  Supreme  Bench  in 
preference  to  any  other  man  in  the  State. 

Logan  was  a  better  lawyer  than  Davis;  but  Davis  was  an 
abler  politician  than  Logan.  I  have  always  felt  that  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  Lincoln  and  Logan  had  been  partners 
earlier,  and  also  neighbors  and  close  friends,  he  ought  to 
have  nominated  Logan  instead  of  Davis.  Davis,  Logan, 
and  Browning  were  all  well  qualified  for  the  Supreme  Court, 
all  of  them  friends  of  Lincoln,  and  all  Whigs.  Lincoln  had 
to  make  the  choice,  and  I  think  the  selection  was  influenced 
by  Davis's  great  assistance  in  securing  his  nomination. 

Judge  Logan  was  also  a  close  Whig  friend  of  my  father, 
and  earnest  in  his  friendship  for  me  on  that  account.  When 
I  was  a  candidate  for  the  nomination  for  Governor  I  had 
a  pretty  stiff  fight  for  the  first  term.  There  were  rumors 
that  men  were  going  to  attack  my  personal  character.  I  did 
not  know  about  the  judge's  action  in  the  premises,  but  when 
the  convention  met,  Judge  Logan  went  to  it  as  a  private 
citizen  and  crowded  himself  into  the  hall,  remaining  there 
until  I  was  nominated.  Then  he  went  home.  I  was  told 
afterwards  that  he  had  gone  there  for  the  purpose  of  de 
fending  me  in  case  of  an  attack  against  my  personal 
character. 

Of  course,  I  could  not  but  greatly  appreciate  a  friendship 
so  manifest. 

He  had  a  son,  David  Logan,  who  went  to  Oregon  as  a 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     41 

young  lawyer,  and  became  very  eminent  there.  In  later 
years  the  judge  wrote  to  him,  proposing  that  if  he  would 
come  back  home  he  would  take  him  into  partnership.  To 
this  the  father  received  a  reply  from  David,  proposing  that 
if  he  would  come  out  there  a  partnership  with  the  son  was 
subject  to  his  acceptance  or  refusal.  The  judge  died  after 
attaining  full  four-score  years,  and  the  son  at  an  age  less 
advanced. 

I  think  Judge  Logan  also  felt  a  bit  sour  toward  Mr. 
Lincoln  because  the  latter,  he  thought,  ought  to  have  been 
more  helpful  than  he  was  to  his  son  in  his  effort  to  be 
elected  to  the  United  States  Senate  from  Oregon,  at  the 
time  Baker  was  elected. 

Speaking  of  Judges  Logan  and  Davis,  I  am  reminded 
of  the  exceptionally  high  character  of  the  lawyers  of  Illi 
nois  of  that  day,  and  more  especially  of  Springfield.  I 
think  there  has  never  been  a  time  when  it  had  another  such 
splendid  bar.  It  must  be  that  high  personal  character  in 
leaders  has  a  direct  and  marked  influence  in  elevating  the 
general  characters  of  the  followers.  The  young  lawyers, 
especially,  are  impelled  by  a  force  implanted  by  nature  to 
admire  and  to  strive  to  imitate  or  attain  to  the  great  qual 
ities  manifested  in  the  life  of  those  to  whom  leadership  is 
conceded  by  common  consent. 

Colonel  E.  D.  Baker  was  a  very  good  lawyer.  Also  Or- 
ville  H.  Browning,  of  Quincy,  who  was  in  Springfield  at 
tending  the  various  courts  whose  sittings  were  at  the  State 
capital  much  of  the  time.  Then  there  was  Archibald  Wil 
liams;  and  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  a  great  man  in  every  way, 
was  on  the  bench  a  part  of  the  time.  Abraham  Lincoln  was, 
of  course,  the  equal  of  any  man,  on  the  bench  or  off  of  it. 
Such  men  prominently  in  the  lead  as  lawyers,  and  as  men 


42      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

among  men,  could  not  but  stimulate  the  ambitions  and  loftier 
aspirations  of  other  lawyers,  especially  the  younger  ones. 
In  striving  to  pay  the  tributes  —  imitation,  etc., —  that  can 
be  accorded  to  greatness,  they  become  great  themselves ;  and 
perhaps  here  may  be  found  the  real  or  chief  cause  of  the 
very  large  numbers  of  conspicuously  eminent  men  congre 
gated  at  the  capital  of  Illinois  in  those  days. 

Judge  Lyman  Trumbull  I  always  regarded  as  one  of  the 
exceptional  lawyers  of  the  country.  I  came  to  know  him 
well  while  I  was  a  member  of  the  House  and  he  a  United 
States  Senator.  During  those  days  I  saw  very  much  of 
him.  When  Trumbull  came  to  the  Senate  there  was  some 
prejudice  against  him,  growing  out  of  circumstances  (re 
lated  elsewhere  in  these  pages)  which  prevented  the  election 
of  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  which  seemed  to  be  plainly  within  Mr. 
Trumbull's  control.  But  the  feeling  soon  vanished,  and 
Trumbull's  course  in  the  Senate  was  so  true  to  the  principles 
of  the  party  which  Mr.  Lincoln  had  championed,  that  the 
manner  in  which  he  had  secured  the  election  was  soon  forgot 
ten,  or  at  least  condoned,  and  the  judge  remained  there  for  a 
long  period  of  service  —  three  terms. 

While  he  was  there  I  came  to  the  House  of  Representa 
tives,  and  came  to  be,  as  our  association  grew  more  and  more 
intimate,  very  fond  of  Senator  Trumbull.  I  also  admired 
his  ability.  He  was  one  of  the  few  in  that  body  who  could 
hold  his  own  with  Judge  Douglas  in  debate,  and  when  he 
came  into  the  Senate  he  at  once  took  issue  with  Douglas,  they 
being  in  controversy  with  each  other  very  frequently  on 
slavery  and  other  political  questions,  until  Douglas's  career 
ended,  about  the  beginning  of  the  Civil  War. 

I  was,  perhaps,  as  intimate  personally  with  Judge  Trum 
bull  during  my  stay  in  the  House  as  any  other  member. 
Barton  C.  Cook  and  Norman  B.  Judd  also  were  as  intimate 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     43 

with  the  judge,  as  any  other  members  of  the  Illinois  delega 
tion.  Nothing  ever  happened  to  change  these  conditions, 
until  the  vote  which  Trumbull  cast  against  the  impeachment 
of  Andrew  Johnson.  Mr.  Cook  and  Mr.  Judd,  especially 
the  latter,  seemed  to  be  almost  bitterly  angry  against  Judge 
Trumbull. 

As  a  result  of  that  vote  opposition  to  him  began  to  grow 
in  the  party.  However,  almost  immediately  after  the  im 
peachment  he  was  reflected,  although  at  the  time  not  a 
candidate.  He  was  subsequently  nominated  by  the  Demo 
cratic  party  for  Governor  of  Illinois.  I  ran  against  him  as 
the  candidate  of  the  Republican  party,  and  was  elected  over 
him  by  a  majority  of  about  thirty-eight  thousand.  He  im 
agined,  so  I  have  heard,  that  he  was  going  to  beat  me,  and 
was  considerably  surprised  at  his  failure  to  do  so. 

He  died  only  a  few  years  ago,  at  an  advanced  age.  His 
first  wife  was  a  sister  of  Dr.  Jayne,  an  excellent  man,  and, 
I  am  glad  to  add,  he  and  I  are  warm  personal  friends.  I 
am  very  sorry  to  say,  though,  that  his  children,  I  believe, 
are  all  gone,  as  are  mine. 

There  were  other  men  who  had  risen  to  prominence  in 
Illinois,  of  whom  I  wish  to  write,  and  some  who  were  then 
new  upon  the  stage  of  public  life,  whom  I  knew  and  who 
subsequently  achieved  distinction.  I  have  already  postponed 
my  reminiscences  of  Mr.  Lincoln  to  a  later  chapter  than  I 
could  wish,  but  in  point  of  time  we  have  now  come  to  the  year 
of  his  nomination  and  election  to  the  Presidency  of  the 
United  States,  and  the  beginning  of  a  career  which  was  to 
be  finished  in  the  course  of  only  a  little  over  four  years. 

The  reference  to  my  old  friend  Doctor  William  Jayne 
reminds  me  that  I  should  say  something  of  my  Springfield 
friends, —  some  living,  but  many  dead.  It  is  to  these  friends 


44      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

that  I  am  indebted  for  my  success  in  public  life,  and  they 
have  generally  loyally  supported  me,  although  friends  in 
other  parts  of  the  State  have  been  quite  as  loyal  and  de 
voted  to  my  interests  when  I  have  been  a  candidate  for  high 
public  office. 

In  the  days  of  Lincoln,  I  do  not  believe  that  there  ever 
was  a  community  that  contained  so  many  really  splendid 
men,  men  who  were  so  well  fitted  to  fill  any  place  in  the 
State  or  Nation,  as  did  Springfield.  I  can  refer  to  only  a 
few  of  those  of  State  and  National  renown.  If  I  have  over 
looked  some  whom  I  should  have  mentioned,  I  hope  I  will 
be  pardoned. 

First  of  all  comes  Lincoln.  From  time  to  time,  as  I  have 
written  these  recollections,  I  have  spoken  of  him.  I  will 
later  give  my  estimate  of  Douglas,  who,  while  not  a  citizen 
of  Springfield,  spent  a  great  deal  of  time  there  as  a  member 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  as  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  and 
on  legal,  political,  and  social  affairs.  In  the  last-mentioned 
connection  he  at  one  time  was  a  rival  for  the  hand  of  Mary 
Todd,  afterwards  Mrs.  Abraham  Lincoln.  I  have  thought 
and  written  something  of  Stephen  T.  Logan,  and  to  my 
own  old  law  partner,  Milton  Hay,  I  refer  in  other  parts  of 
these  recollections.  There  were  no  better  lawyers  in  their 
day. 

William  H.  Herndon,  Lincoln's  law  partner,  was  a  ca 
pable  lawyer  also.  He  wrote  an  excellent  life  of  his 
distinguished  partner.  Herndon  was  one  of  the  earliest  Re 
publicans  of  the  State.  While  Lincoln  believed  in  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  party  from  the  very  beginning,  the  truth  is,  he 
was  a  little  slow  in  becoming  a  member  of  it ;  and  Herndon 
always  claimed  that  he  had  much  to  do  with  making  Abra 
ham  Lincoln  an  active  member  of  the  Republican  party. 
Herndon  believed  that  he  was  qualified  to  fill  almost  any 


RICHARD    YATES 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     45 

office,  and  I  think  he  was  a  little  dissatisfied  that  Lincoln  did 
not  give  him  some  high  position. 

William  Butler,  belonging  to  this  same  period,  was  one 
of  the  leading  citizens  and  a  devoted  friend  of  Lincoln 
and  an  excellent  man.  Nor  can  I  forget  Antram  Camp 
bell,  one  of  my  first  law  partners.  We  were  always  warm 
friends.  I  saw  him  on  his  death-bed  when  I  returned  home 
from  Washington,  where  I  was  serving  as  a  Member  of 
Congress.  He  recognized  me,  but  could  not  speak,  and  I 
can  see  now  the  tears  falling  from  his  eyes. 

Of  the  State  officers  of  that  day,  Richard  Yates  was  Gov 
ernor.  The  State,  under  the  lead  of  its  War  Governor,  did 
not  waste  time  or  spare  money  in  putting  the  troops  in  read 
iness  for  the  field,  and  perhaps  there  was  no  governor  of 
any  State  more  watchful  of  the  State's  interests,  or  more 
devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  Union,  or  more  loved  by  the 
people  of  his  own  State,  including  the  troops  in  the  field, 
than  was  Governor  Yates.  He  was  loyalty  itself,  and  for 
many  years  was  an  apostle  of  liberty.  He  retired  from  the 
office  of  governor,  to  take  his  place  as  a  senator  from  Illi 
nois  in  the  United  States  Senate.  His  fame,  however,  rests 
on  being  the  great  War  Governor  of  the  State  of  Illinois, 
the  compeer  of  Morton,  Andrews,  and  Curtis. 

His  son,  Richard  Yates,  many  years  later  succeeded  to 
the  office  of  governor,  and  is  one  of  the  prominent  men  of 
Springfield  to-day. 

O.  M.  Hatch  was  Secretary  of  State.  He  was  among 
my  early  influential  friends  in  Springfield.  Uncle  Jesse  K. 
DuBois,  for  whom  I  had  high  regard,  and  who  was  quite 
well  known  in  and  out  of  Illinois,  was  one  of  the  State  of 
ficers.  O.  H.  Miner  was  Auditor  of  the  State  at  one  time. 
He  was  a  very  good  man.  His  son,  Louis  Miner,  and 
Harry  Dorwin,  a  nephew  of  my  deceased  wife,  are  joint 


46      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

owners  of  the  Springfield  Journal,  one  of  the  oldest  Re 
publican  organs  of  the  State. 

Colonel  John  Williams  could  not  be  said  to  be  a  National 
or  State  character,  but  he  was  a  good  business  man,  and  one 
of  the  best  friends  I  ever  had,  so  I  cannot  refrain  from  a 
passing  tribute  to  his  memory. 

When  I  was  elected  to  Congress  the  first  time,  in  1864,  my 
friends  knew  that  I  had  spent  a  considerable  sum  of  money 
for  election  expenses.  It  being  Lincoln's  district,  and  Lin 
coln  being  a  candidate  for  reelection  as  President,  the 
National  Committee  helped  some ;  but  I  was  naturally  com 
pelled  to  spend  a  great  deal  myself.  I  considered  to  whom 
I  should  apply  for  assistance,  and  thought  of  Colonel  Wil 
liams.  I  went  to  him,  candidly  explaining  that  I  should  be 
unable  to  make  the  race  without  financial  assistance ;  he  told 
me  to  draw  on  him  for  whatever  funds  I  might  want,  and  at 
the  end  to  let  him  know  the  total  amount,  and  that  he  would 
take  care  of  it.  I  did  so.  He  gave  me  what  I  asked  for, 
and  I  gave  him  my  note,  which  I  paid  as  soon  as  I  could; 
but  he  never  bothered  me  about  it.  I  always  had  a  warm 
spot  for  him  in  my  heart. 

Nicholas  H.  Ridgely,  the  grandfather  of  the  Hon.  Wil 
liam  Barret  Ridgely,  who  married  one  of  my  daughters, 
and  who  served  as  United  States  Comptroller  of  the  Cur 
rency  for  a  number  of  years,  was  one  of  the  leading  bankers 
of  the  State,  and  was  reputed  to  be  one  of  the  first  mil 
lionaires  of  Illinois.  He  was  a  very  careful  banker,  and 
was  probably  too  careful  to  be  popular  among  the  people 
generally;  but  every  one  knew  that  there  was  no  sounder 
institution  in  the  State  than  the  Ridgely  National  Bank. 
His  son,  Charles  Ridgely,  whom  I  always  regarded  as  one 
of  the  most  interesting  men  in  Springfield,  has  passed  away 
just  about  the  time  that  I  am  writing  these  lines.  Mr. 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     47 

Charles  Ridgely  was  a  man  of  great  reading  and  great  culti 
vation,  and  a  man  whom  any  one  would  like  to  meet.  His 
death  was  a  loss  to  Springfield  of  one  of  its  most  interesting 
and  enterprising  characters. 

S.  H.  Jones  ("Sam"  Jones,  as  he  was  known)  was  an 
other  well-known  character  in  Springfield,  as  well  as  through 
out  Illinois.  He  was  a  warm  friend  and  supporter  of  mine 
in  the  early  days. 

James  C.  Robinson  was  twice  elected  to  Congress.  He 
and  Governor  Oglesby  were  opponents  for  State  Senator 
from  the  district.  A  little  story  in  this  connection  occurs 
to  me,  which  Oglesby  used  to  tell. 

When  running  for  the  Senate,  before  the  Civil  War, 
Oglesby  and  Robinson  travelled  together  over  the  district. 
The  settlements  in  those  days  were  very  scattering,  and  as 
the  rivals  were  good  friends  personally  they  agreed  to  go 
together  and  hold  joint  discussions.  They  held  one  every 
day,  the  understanding  being  that  if  either  desired  to  talk 
anywhere  else  aside  from  the  joint  debate  he  had  a  right  to 
do  so. 

At  one  place  Robinson  announced  that  he  would  make 
a  speech  in  the  courthouse.  A  large  crowd  greeted  him, 
which  he  captured  with  one  of  his  characteristic  speeches. 
Oglesby  was  sitting  in  front  of  the  hotel  across  the  way  by 
himself,  and  listening  to  the  cheering.  He  became  very 
uneasy  lest  Robinson  should  get  the  best  of  it. 

Now  it  chanced  that  Oglesby  could  play  a  violin  splen 
didly.  A  man  came  along  with  one  in  his  hands,  and 
Oglesby  asked  if  he  might  borrow  it  for  the  evening,  to 
which  the  man  consented.  He  commenced  playing  in  order 
to  attract  the  crowd  from  Robinson,  and  in  order  to  break 
up  his  meeting.  He  succeeded;  one  by  one  they  came  out 
of  the  courthouse,  and  when  Oglesby  swung  into  a  stirring 


48      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

dance  measure  the  crowd  at  once  responded  with  an  im 
promptu  hoe-down. 

Robinson,  seeing  his  audience  dwindling,  quit  speaking 
and  came  out  himself.  Taking  in  the  situation  at  a  glance, 
he  pulled  off  his  shoes  and  became  the  most  enthusiastic 
participant,  dancing  first  with  one  and  then  with  another 
of  his  late  hearers,  winning  them  all  back  again  and  com 
pletely  turning  the  tables  against  his  adroit  opponent. 

This  is  a  good  illustration  of  early  campaigning  in  the 
country  districts  of  Illinois.  There  was  the  utmost  good 
feeling,  and  a  disposition  to  let  the  best  man  win. 

Among  the  early  men  and  incidents  connected  with  the 
practice  of  the  law  in  Springfield,  in  the  sixties,  and  before 
and  during  the  time  I  was  Speaker  of  the  House,  the 
Rev.  Peter  Cartwright  must  not  be  forgotten.  He  was  one 
of  the  prominent  figures  in  the  pioneer  educational  and 
religious  life  of  the  Western  country,  more  particularly  of 
Illinois.  He  was  a  wonderful  type  of  the  times  —  a  man  of 
great  courage,  of  considerable  ability,  and  most  remarkable 
in  his  capacity  as  a  minister  of  the  Gospel.  He  believed  in 
camp-meetings;  and  when  Peter  Cartwright  conducted  a 
camp-meeting  the  loafers  and  rowdies  inclined  to  interrupt 
the  worship  knew  they  would  invite  trouble  if  they  ventured 
to  interfere  with  or  annoy  the  meeting.  He  was  ready,  not 
only  to  preach  the  Gospel  but  to  fight,  as  sometimes  he  felt 
it  his  duty  to  do.  No  man  dared  in  the  presence  of  Cart 
wright  to  interrupt  the  meeting,  as  in  those  times  irresponsi 
ble  parties  hanging  about  such  gatherings  frequently  at 
tempted  to  do  in  his  absence. 

Cartwright  was  not  only  an  able  pioneer  preacher,  but 
he  was  a  loyal  Democrat,  too.  He  believed  in  Democracy, 
and  was  ready  to  run  on  the  Democratic  ticket,  or  to  ad 
vance  the  party's  cause  in  any  other  way.  He  was  nomi- 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     49 

nated  for  Congress  as  against  Mr.  Lincoln,  the  only  time 
Lincoln  ever  ran  for  Congress. 

Some  persons  disapproved  of  Cartwright's  activity  in 
politics,  questioning  the  propriety  of  it  on  the  part  of  a 
minister.  Among  these  was  Judge  Treat,  then  our  Federal 
Judge  in  the  Springfield  district.  The  story  goes  that  the 
judge  signified  to  Mr.  Lincoln  his  dislike  of  Cartwright, 
and  his  willingness  to  lend  a  helping  hand  in  case  Lincoln 
should  need  help  and  would  let  him  know  the  fact.  He 
thought  he  could  get  a  good  many  votes  for  Lincoln,  and 
the  latter  thanked  him  and  told  him  if  he  found  need  of  his 
help  he  would  let  him  know.  On  one  occasion  during  the 
campaign  Lincoln  was  walking  along  one  side  of  the  street 
when  he  saw  Treat  on  the  farther  side,  proceeding  in  the 
opposite  direction,  toward  his  home.  Lincoln  called  out  to 
him:  "Judge,  I  won't  need  your  help.  I  have  got  the  better 
of  the  old  Methodist  preacher,  and  I  will  beat  him ;  so  I  will 
not  have  to  call  upon  you  for  help."  This  so  embarrassed 
the  judge,  lest  some  one  should  hear  what  was  being  said, 
that  he  almost  ran,  in  his  hurry  to  get  into  his  house. 

It  so  happened  that  some  of  Peter  Cartwright's  grand 
children  were  somewhat  reckless  boys,  and  one  of  them 
killed  another  young  man.  Mr.  Peyton  Harrison,  the 
father  of  the  slayer,  was  a  friend  of  Mr.  Lincoln  and  also 
of  Judge  Logan,  and  had  grown  to  be  a  good  friend  of 
mine,  I  being  a  young  lawyer.  The  two  and  I  were  em 
ployed  in  the  defence  of  the  young  man.  I  did  the  run 
ning  about,  and  other  things  necessary  to  be  done  until  the 
time  arrived  for  the  trial.  I  had  the  accused  man  in  my 
house  part  of  the  intervening  time.  When  the  Circuit 
Court  convened  he,  having  been  previously  indicted,  was  de 
livered  up  and  the  trial  came  on.  It  lasted  some  ten  or 
twelve  days.  In  the  meantime,  Peter  Cartwright,  and  his 


50      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

daughter  Mrs.  Harrison,  the  mother  of  the  young  man  on 
trial,  were  at  my  house  most  of  the  time.  They  drove  into 
town  from  where  they  lived,  some  ten  or  twelve  miles  out, 
every  day,  and  remained  until  nearly  night,  going  back  and 
forth  as  long  as  the  trial  lasted.  Cartwright  became  some 
what  attached  to  me  on  account  of  my  efforts  in  the  young 
man's  behalf. 

The  trial  resulted  in  the  acquittal  of  young  Harrison,  in 
whose  behalf  Mr.  Lincoln  and  Judge  Logan  exerted  them 
selves  very  earnestly. 

Springfield  seems  changed  to  me  since  my  old  friend, 
David  T.  Littler,  passed  away.  If  I  visited  Springfield  dur 
ing  the  heat  of  Summer,  when  every  one  else  was  gone,  I 
was  always  sure  that  Dave  Littler  would  be  there  to  greet 
me.  Littler  was  a  unique  character.  His  manners  and 
speech  were  bluff  and  frank;  he  never  was  afraid  of  any 
one,  and  never  was  afraid  to  speak  just  exactly  what  he 
thought.  Senator  Littler,  Colonel  Bluford  Wilson,  a  par 
ticularly  devoted  friend,  and  I  travelled  through  Europe 
together,  and  we  had  a  great  time. 

Littler  was  for  many  years  a  member  of  the  State  Senate 
of  Illinois,  and  was  a  very  useful  member  in  securing 
favors  for  his  district;  and  there  is  no  district  in  the  State 
more  dependent  upon  the  Legislature  than  the  Springfield 
district.  He  was  very  ambitious,  and  when  many  of  my 
friends  in  Illinois  believed  that  President  McKinley  would 
honor  me  with  an  appointment  to  his  cabinet,  he  thought 
he  was  pretty  sure  to  succeed  me  in  the  United  States  Senate. 
My  secret  opinion  was  that  the  politicians  who  were  running 
State  affairs  at  that  time  were  fooling  him;  but  it  never 
came  to  a  test,  as  I  did  not  enter  the  cabinet. 

It  is  a  pleasure  to  record  that  I  was  able  to  show  a  sub 
stantial  token  of  friendship  when,  through  my  influence, 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     51 

Senator  Littler  was  appointed  by  President  Cleveland  one  of 
the  Pacific  Railroad  Commissioners. 

Speaking  of  Colonel  Littler  reminds  me  of  our  mutual 
friend,  Mr.  Rheuna  Lawrence,  an  estimable  citizen  of 
Springfield  in  his  day.  When  I  was  reelected  to  the  Senate 
in  the  Winter  of  1901,  Rheuna  Lawrence  and  David  Lit 
tler  were  both  desperately  ill.  I  visited  them  both  before 
leaving  for  Washington.  Lawrence  died  soon  after,  but 
Littler  recovered  and  lived  for  a  year  or  two. 

Rheuna  Lawrence  was  intensely  interested  in  my  campaign 
in  1900.  He  attended  the  Peoria  convention  as  one  of  the 
Springfield  delegates.  There  was  a  contesting  delegation 
from  Sangamon  County,  and  my  friends,  among  whom  were 
Lawrence  and  Littler,  were  seated.  My  friends  won  out 
all  along  the  line,  and  the  excitement  was  too  much  for 
Rheuna,  who  was  not  a  drinking  man  at  all;  but  he  and  Dave 
got  in  their  cups,  and  it  was  very  amusing  to  those  who 
knew  Mr.  Lawrence  as  one  of  the  cleanest  and  most  estima 
ble  of  our  citizens  to  hear  Littler  refer  to  him  as  "my 
drunken  friend,  Rheuna."  All  of  which,  of  course,  was 
only  a  little  pleasantry  which  I  repeat  for  the  benefit  of 
those  who  attended  that  convention,  and  who  knew  Lawrence 
and  Littler  well. 

James  C.  Conkling  was  a  prominent  lawyer  at  home,  in 
the  days  of  Lincoln.  He  was  a  zealous  Republican  and  a 
stanch  supporter  of  Lincoln;  also  a  lawyer  and  a  business 
man;  but  for  some  reason  or  other,  I  do  not  know  why,  he 
became  involved  and  failed,  and  the  people,  especially  the 
older  citizens,  insisted  that  he  be  appointed  postmaster.  I 
recommended  him,  and  the  appointment  was  made.  He 
served  a  term  and  passed  away.  His  son,  Mr.  Clinton 
Conkling,  is  now  one  of  the  leading  attorneys  of  the  city. 

Henry  Green  was  noted  as  a  great  lawyer.     He  came  to 


52      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Illinois  from  Canada  and  studied  law  in  Clinton  County 
with  the  Hon.  Lawrence  Weldon,  who  was  a  prominent 
lawyer  himself,  and  for  years  served  as  a  member  of  the 
Court  of  Claims  at  Washington.  Weldon  was  a  lovable 
character.  Green  was  for  some  years  the  partner  of  Mil 
ton  Hay,  the  firm  being  Hay,  Green  and  Littler;  it  changed 
later  to  Green  and  Humphrey.  While  I  always  believed 
that  Hay  was  the  best  lawyer  in  the  State,  many  lawyers 
believed  that  Green  was  the  ablest  in  connection  with  rail 
road  litigation. 

The  Hon.  O.  H.  Browning  was  one  of  the  most  promi 
nent  men  of  Illinois  in  the  early  times,  and  was  about 
Springfield,  the  capital,  a  great  deal,  attending  the  Federal 
Court,  and  also  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State.  Brown 
ing,  Archibald  Williams,  and  Jack  Grimshaw  were  all  three 
very  excellent  lawyers,  quite  prominent  in  their  profession, 
as  well  as  associates  in  the  Whig  party.  Browning  was 
probably  the  most  prominent  of  the  three.  He  was  ap 
pointed  by  Governor  Yates  to  succeed  Douglas,  after  the 
death  of  the  latter,  in  the  United  States  Senate.  Of  course 
he  did  not  remain  there  long,  being  succeeded,  I  think,  by 
William  A.  Richardson,  a  strong  Democrat  of  Quincy, 
and  a  man  of  considerable  ability.  After  he  went  out  of 
the  Senate,  Browning  was  appointed  by  Andrew  Johnson 
as  Secretary  of  the  Interior.  He  became  a  follower  of  Mr. 
Johnson,  who  had  broken  with  the  Republican  party,  and 
when  he  got  out  of  office,  I  think  he  ceased  to  take  any  part 
in  politics.  He  had  been  talked  about  a  good  deal  at  one 
time  as  the  proper  man  for  the  Supreme  bench,  but  as  be 
tween  him  and  Logan  and  Davis,  Mr.  Lincoln  decided  in 
favor  of  Davis. 

It  is  impossible  to  mention  all  of  the  many  friends  and 
supporters  loyal  and  devoted  to  me  who  are  now  living,  but 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     53 

I  shall  be  pardoned,  I  am  sure,  for  saying  a  few  words  in 
reference  to  some  of  them  at  present  in  Springfield,  who  are 
especially  esteemed. 

I  have  been  away  from  Springfield  most  of  the  time  for 
nearly  thirty  years,  and  as  I  go  back  there  during  the  va 
cations  for  brief  periods,  I  feel  lonely,  because  so  many  of 
the  familiar  faces  of  earlier  days  have  passed  away.  As 
I  walk  the  streets  now  it  seems  that  I  know  comparatively 
few  people ;  but  I  have  the  best  of  reasons  for  knowing  that 
among  them  are  many  splendid  men. 

I  like  to  feel,  on  the  eve  of  visiting  Springfield,  that  I 
shall  see  my  friend,  Judge  J.  Otis  Humphrey,  United  States 
District  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois.  I 
have  all  the  affection  and  interest  in  Judge  Humphrey 
that  one  could  entertain  for  a  brother,  and  I  know  that  he 
has  the  same  feeling  for  me.  He  is  an  able  man,  and  is 
regarded  by  the  Bar  as  the  ablest  judge  who  has  ever  oc 
cupied  the  United  States  District  Bench  at  Springfield. 
I  have  known  him  from  his  boyhood,  and  knew  his  father 
before  him.  It  was  one  of  the  great  pleasures  of  my  public 
career  to  have  been  able  to  secure  from  the  late  President 
McKinley  his  appointment  as  United  States  Attorney  for 
the  Southern  District  of  Illinois,  and  later  to  have  secured 
his  promotion  to  the  position  of  United  States  District 
Judge.  He  is  now  the  senior  United  States  District  Judge 
of  the  seventh  circuit,  and  I  regard  him  as  the  ablest  judge 
of  them  all.  I  sincerely  hope  that  higher  honors,  which  he 
so  well  deserves  in  his  chosen  career,  are  still  in  store  for 
him. 

In  connection  with  Judge  Humphrey  I  am  reminded  of 
the  late  Judge  Solomon  H.  Bethea,  who  was  appointed 
United  States  Attorney  for  the  Northern  District  of  Illinois, 
and  who  was  later  promoted  to  the  Federal  Bench.  Hum- 


54      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

phrey  and  Bethea  I  have  always  regarded  as  my  two 
judges,  as  they  were  both  appointed  on  my  recommenda 
tion.  Bethea  was  a  man  of  a  very  strong  and  positive 
character.  These  traits  were  so  conspicuous  that  his  man 
ners  were,  by  some,  regarded  as  extremely  dictatorial.  He 
was  highly  educated,  a  student  all  his  life,  and  a  very  culti 
vated  man.  At  the  same  time  he  was  a  first-rate  politician. 
I  do  not  know  of  two  more  useful  men  to  lead  a  floor  fight 
in  a  convention  than  Bethea  and  Humphrey.  Judge  Bethea 
was  my  friend  and  supporter  from  the  time  I  was  elected 
to  the  United  States  Senate,  in  1883,  until  his  death.  He 
made  a  splendid  record  as  United  States  Attorney,  and  I 
am  informed  that  during  his  incumbency  of  that  office,  he 
never  lost  a  case  before  a  jury.  Very  unfortunately,  just 
when  he  reached  the  goal  of  his  highest  ambition,  a  Federal 
judgeship,  his  health  failed.  I  have  never  for  a  moment 
doubted  that  had  he  lived  and  retained  his  health  he  would 
have  made  an  enviable  record  on  the  bench. 

There  is  no  better  man  in  Springfield  than  John  W. 
Bunn.  He  has  been  my  friend  ever  since  I  first  went  to 
Springfield.  He  was  a  friend  of  Lincoln,  and  there  was 
no  one  in  Springfield  in  whom  Lincoln  placed  more  con 
fidence.  I  believe  that  one  of  the  first  appointments  he 
made,  after  entering  the  office  of  President,  was  that  of 
John  W.  Bunn  as  Pension  Agent  at  Springfield.  He  was 
the  trusted  friend  of  the  War  Governor,  Yates,  and  per 
formed  many  important  duties  for  him  during  the  Civil 
War.  From  those  early  days  down  to  the  present,  every 
one  has  had  confidence  in  John  W.  Bunn  and  in  his  integrity 
and  honesty.  I  am  glad  to  say  that  he  is  still  living  as  one 
of  the  foremost  citizens  of  his  city. 

The  Hon.  James  A.  Connelly,  who  for  two  terms  repre 
sented  the  district  in  Congress,  was  a  very  influential  and 


OTHER  DISTINGUISHED  CHARACTERS     55 

popular  member  of  Congress;  and  being  a  good  lawyer 
he  was  a  prominent  member  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  of 
the  House.  He  is  a  forcible  speaker,  and  has  always  taken 
an  active  part  in  behalf  of  the  party  in  campaigns  in  the 
State. 

Mr.  E.  F.  Leonard  —  Frank  Leonard,  as  he  was  fa 
miliarly  know  among  his  friends  —  was  my  secretary  when 
I  was  Governor  of  Illinois.  He  was  later  president  of  the 
Toledo,  Peoria  and  Western  Railroad,  stationed  at  Peoria, 
and  I  have  always  believed  him  to  be  one  of  the  best  rail 
road  presidents  in  the  State.  He  was  particularly  noted 
for  his  sound  common  sense  and  as  a  scholarly,  well  posted 
man  in  public  affairs.  I  do  not  think  he  ever  said  or  did  a 
foolish  thing  in  his  life.  He  has  retired  from  business,  and 
lives  quietly  and  elegantly,  being  a  man  of  wealth,  at  the 
beautiful  little  college  town  of  Amherst,  Massachusetts,  in 
the  vicinity  of  which  he  was  born. 

One  of  the  oldest  men  in  Springfield  is  Edward  Thayer. 
He  has  been  a  merchant  in  that  town  ever  since  I  first  went 
there,  and  was  engaged  in  business  there  some  years  before 
that,  I  believe.  His  father  was  living  when  I  first  went  to 
Springfield,  and  was  a  very  refined,  cultivated,  elegant 
Eastern  gentleman.  Mr.  Thayer,  although  over  ninety- 
five,  still  seems  to  enjoy  the  best  of  health,  and  attends  his 
store  every  day. 

The  present  Governor  of  Illinois,  the  Hon.  Charles  S. 
Deneen,  although  a  citizen  of  Chicago,  has  lived  in  Spring 
field  for  nearly  six  years,  during  his  incumbency  of  office. 
Governor  Deneen  has  had  a  very  successful  public  career. 
He  has  creditably  filled  every  public  office  which  he  has 
held.  I  have  been  interested  in  him,  not  only  on  his  own 
account,  but  on  account  of  his  father,  whom  I  knew  well 
and  whom  I  respected  highly.  Years  ago  I  obtained  his 


56      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

appointment  in  the  consular  service,  in  which  he  served  dur 
ing  the  Harrison  administration.  Governor  Deneen  has 
taken  a  prominent  part  in  public  affairs  in  Cook  County 
and  has  held  several  responsible  positions  there.  He  made  a 
splendid  State's  Attorney  of  Cook  County.  His  honesty 
and  integrity  were  above  suspicion.  His  record  as  State's 
Attorney  paved  the  way  to  the  higher  office  of  Governor 
of  Illinois.  He  is  a  conservative  man,  and  has  given  the 
State  a  conservative  administration.  Unfortunately  he  has 
had  difficulties  with  the  Legislature,  but  on  the  whole  I  re 
gard  his  administration  as  a  successful  and  creditable  one. 
Governor  Deneen  and  I  are  the  only  two  men  in  the  history 
of  the  State  who  have  been  honored  by  its  people  by  being 
reflected  to  succeed  themselves  as  Governor. 


CHAPTER  V 

NOMINATION  OF  LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  FOR  THE  PRESIDENCY 

1859  AND  1860 

RETURNING  to  the  period  preceding  the  Civil  War, 
we  observe  that  the  whole  nation  was  stirred  by  the 
conduct  of  a  man  whom  most  people  believed  to  be  crazy, 
but  who  in  my  judgment  was  not.  He  was  an  enthusiast, 
fired  by  an  abnormal  zeal,  perhaps ;  but  he  filled  a  most  im 
portant  place  in  the  developments  leading  to  the  Civil  War. 
I  refer  to  old  John  Brown. 

With  a  score  of  followers  he  seized  the  arsenal  at  Harpers 
Ferry  in  October,  1859.  The  nation  was  then  on  the  very 
verge  of  civil  war.  There  was  tremendous  excitement  even 
in  far-off  Springfield  when  the  news  came  over  the  wires 
that  John  Brown  had  opened  war  almost  single-handed  and 
alone.  Under  order  from  General-in-Chief  Winfield  Scott, 
Colonel  Robert  E.  Lee  with  a  battalion  of  soldiers  marched 
on  Harpers  Ferry,  and,  after  a  series  of  siege  operations, 
summoned  John  Brown  to  surrender,  the  demand  being 
borne  to  the  besieged  by  J.  E.  B.  Stuart,  a  young  lieutenant, 
afterwards  distinguished  as  the  foremost  cavalry  leader  of 
the  Confederacy. 

The  story  of  John  Brown  is  too  familiar  to  be  repeated 
here;  but  how  strange  that  in  so  short  a  time  his  captor, 
Robert  E.  Lee,  should  become  famous  as  one  of  the  great 
est  leaders  of  force  in  rebellion  against  the  government  he 
then  served. 

John  Brown  was  captured  and  hanged.  He  had  but  few 

57 


58      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

sympathizers  in  the  North,  but  his  attempt  to  incite  the 
slaves  to  rebellion  greatly  stirred  up  the  entire  South,  and 
hastened  secession. 

Very  soon  the  second  National  Republican  Convention 
was  held  at  Chicago.  At  this  convention,  which  nominated 
Lincoln  for  the  Presidency,  the  resolutions  declared  for 
"the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the  right  of  each  State  to 
order  and  control  its  own  domestic  institutions  according 
to  its  own  judgment  exclusively,"  and  condemned  the  at 
tempt  to  enforce  the  extreme  pretensions  of  a  purely  local 
interest  (meaning  the  slave  interest),  through  the  inter 
vention  of  Congress  and  the  courts,  by  the  Democratic 
administration.  They  derided  the  new  dogma  that  the 
Constitution  of  its  own  force  carried  slavery  into  the  Ter 
ritories,  and  denied  the  authority  of  Congress,  or  of  a  Ter 
ritorial  Legislature,  or  of  any  individual  to  give  leave  of 
existence  to  slavery  in  any  Territory  of  the  United  States. 

After  the  failure  of  the  efforts  to  make  of  Kansas  a  Slave 
State,  it  had  become  plain  that  the  South  could  not  hope  to 
keep  its  equality  of  representation  in  the  Senate  without 
reversing  what  appeared  to  be  settled  popular  opinion  con 
cerning  the  status  of  the  Northern  Territories.  Resolutions 
to  this  general  effect  were  moved  by  Jefferson  Davis  early 
in  February,  1860,  and  passed  by  the  Senate.  It  was  in 
effect  the  ultimatum  presented  to  the  Democratic  party  at  its 
National  Convention  when  it  assembled,  April  23,  at 
Charleston,  S.  C.  The  warring  factions  failed  to  come 
to  an  agreement,  and  the  convention  adjourned  to  meet  at 
Baltimore  on  the  eighteenth  of  June.  There  Douglas  was 
at  last  nominated.  The  delegates  who  had  seceded  at 
Charleston  were  joined  by  other  seceders  at  Baltimore,  and 
nominated  John  C.  Breckinridge  of  Kentucky  for  Presi 
dent.  A  month  later,  May  19,  a  third  faction,  calling  itself 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     59 

the  "Constitutional  Union  Party,"  assembled  in  convention 
at  the  same  city,  Baltimore,  and  nominated  John  Bell  of 
Tennessee  and  Edward  Everett  of  Massachusetts,  on  a 
platform  whose  distinguishing  battle-cry  was  "The  Con 
stitution,  the  Union  of  the  States,  and  the  enforcement  of 
the  laws."  Three  days  before  this,  May  sixteenth,  the  Re 
publican  Convention  had  met  at  Chicago,  and  had  nominated 
Lincoln  and  Hamlin  on  a  platform  which  rang  true  on  great 
principles  and  with  high  resolve. 

In  many  particulars  this  platform  was  a  contrast  to, 
rather  than  a  growth  from,  that  of  1856.  It  asserted  that 
the  normal  condition  of  all  the  territory  of  the  United  States 
was  that  of  freedom;  it  denounced  the  outrages  in  Kansas, 
and  demanded  her  immediate  admission  into  the  Union, 
with  her  Constitution,  as  a  Free  State;  it  branded  the  re 
opening  of  the  African  slave-trade  as  a  crime;  and  in  ex 
pressing  the  abhorrence  of  the  Republican  party  to  all 
schemes  of  disunion,  the  Democratic  party  was  arraigned  for 
its  silence  in  the  presence  of  threats  of  secession  made  by  its 
own  members.  The  doctrine  of  encouragement  to  domestic 
industry  w^as  announced;  the  sale  of  the  public  lands  was 
condemned;  the  coming  measure  of  securing  homesteads  for 
the  landless  was  approved;  and  a  pledge  of  protection  was 
given  to  all  citizens,  whether  native  or  naturalized,  and 
whether  at  home  or  abroad.  The  party  was  again  pledged 
to  the  construction  of  a  railway  to  the  Pacific  Ocean,  and  to 
the  improvements  of  the  rivers  and  harbors  of  the  country. 

During  the  four  years  preceding,  the  home  State  of 
Lincoln  and  Douglas  had  decreased  its  public  debt  $3,104,- 
374.  She  had  become  the  fourth  State  of  the  Union  in 
population  and  wealth,  having  during  the  decade  then  clos 
ing  outstripped  Virginia,  Massachusetts,  North  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Tennessee,  and  Indiana.  In  production  of  wheat 


60      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  corn  she  now  surpassed  all  other  States  and  occupied 
the  foremost  position.  She  had  in  successful  operation 
two  thousand,  nine  hundred  miles  of  railways,  being  sur 
passed  in  this  respect  by  Ohio  only.  Chicago,  her  mar 
vellous  lake  mart,  had  grown  from  a  population  of  29,963 
to  109,206,  an  increase  of  nearly  three  hundred  per  cent. 
From  nine  Congressmen  in  1850,  she  was  entitled  in  1860 
to  thirteen;  and  so,  on  every  hand,  might  the  recital  of 
her  growth  be  continued  indefinitely. 

For  the  first  time  in  twenty  years,  during  the  progress 
of  a  political  campaign  in  Illinois,  the  voice  of  Lincoln  was 
not  heard.  But  the  record  of  his  former  speeches,  printed 
by  an  enterprising  Ohio  publishing  firm,  in  a  volume  which 
sold  in  enormous  numbers,  afforded  the  text  from  which 
the  Republican  stump-orators  in  every  Free  State  gathered 
at  once  their  logic  and  their  inspiration.  Though  the  orator 
himself  remained  silent,  the  potent  echo  of  his  eloquence 
resounded  in  countless  voices  from  the  Atlantic  to  the 
Pacific. 

The  political  contest  that  followed  the  various  nomina 
tions  was  a  memorable  one.  Douglas  made  his  last  effort  for 
the  Presidency  with  wonderful  vigor  and  spirit.  He  can 
vassed  the  whole  country,  and  great  throngs  were  greatly 
moved  by  his  eloquent  and  energetic  oratory.  Jefferson 
Davis  and  other  Southern  orators  canvassed  portions  of  the 
Northern  States  in  support  of  the  nominee  of  the  Southern 
wing  of  the  Democratic  party.  In  some  parts  of  the  North 
fusions  were  attempted  among  the  opponents  of  the  Re 
publican  candidate.  In  the  South  the  interest  in  the  con 
test  was  even  more  intense  than  in  the  North.  Douglas  had 
a  good  following  in  many  portions  of  the  South,  but  a  ma 
jority  of  the  ruling  class  there,  whether  they  had  formerly 
been  Democrats  or  Whigs,  were  now  disposed  to  bring  the 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     61 

long  sectional  controversy  to  an  issue.  Therefore,  besides 
the  debate  over  the  Presidential  issue,  there  was  serious  dis 
cussion  also  of  what  course  the  South  should  take  in  the 
event  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  election.  In  all  the  Cotton  States 
the  sentiment  for  secession  was  now  very  strong.  The 
Alabama  Legislature,  early  in  1860,  had  instructed  her 
Governor  to  call  a  convention  in  case  a  "Black  Republican" 
should  be  elected  President  in  November.  South  Carolina 
had  long  been  ready  to  join  in  such  a  movement,  or  to  lead  it. 

At  last,  election  day  came,  and  the  results,  immediate  as 
well  as  ulterior,  are  deserving  of  some  remark.  The  ag 
gregate  popular  vote  exceeded  four  million,  six  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand ;  and  of  the  total,  one  million,  eight  hundred 
and  sixty-six  thousand  votes  were  given  for  Mr.  Lincoln; 
and  of  the  three  hundred  and  three  electoral  votes,  he  re 
ceived  one  hundred  and  eighty.  Mr.  Breckinridge,  the 
candidate  of  the  South,  received  eight  hundred  and  forty- 
seven  thousand  votes,  and  seventy-two  votes  in  the  Elec 
toral  College;  while  Mr.  Douglas  received  only  twelve  elec 
toral  votes,  although  his  popular  vote  reached  a  million, 
three  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand.  Bell  received 
thirty-nine  electoral  votes  on  a  popular  vote  of  less  than 
six  hundred  thousand.  Thus  the  popular  vote  for  Mr. 
Lincoln  was  nearly  a  half -million  less  than  a  majority;  but 
his  predecessor,  Mr.  Buchanan,  was  also  a  minority  Presi 
dent,  so  that  this  fact  as  a  pretext  for  secession  was  wholly 
without  point. 

Eleven  States  voted  for  Mr.  Breckinridge,  including 
Delaware  and  Maryland;  and  eleven  States  became  mem 
bers  of  the  Confederacy,  including  Virginia  and  Tennessee, 
which  had  voted  for  Mr.  Bell.  It  all  went  to  show  that  the 
Democratic  party  as  represented  by  Breckinridge  was  in 
fact  a  secession  party  first  of  all.  The  division  of  the 


62      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Democratic  party  decided  the  election  in  favor  of  Mr. 
Lincoln. 

Had  that  party  supported  Mr.  Douglas  in  good  faith, 
his  election  would  probably  have  been  secured;  but  the 
South  would  have  been  left  without  excuse  had  it  persisted 
in  the  scheme  of  secession. 

Therefore  it  came  to  pass  that  the  Democratic  party  was 
disorganized  by  its  own  leaders  of  the  South  as  a  step  pre 
liminary  to  the  election  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  the  making  of 
that  election  a  pretext  for  disunion.  This  part  of  the  con 
spiracy  was  managed  with  consummate  skill  and  eminent 
success;  but  the  conspirators  were  perfectly  well  aware  that 
ultimate  success  depended  largely  on  prompt,  effective,  and 
decisive  steps  which  must  be  taken  while  their  efficient 
friend  in  the  Executive  Mansion  still  remained  in  office. 

This  allowed  them  four  months  of  precious  time  between 
the  election  of  Mr.  Lincoln  and  his  inauguration  as  Presi 
dent.  The  vigilance  and  effectiveness  of  their  work  is  an 
interesting  and  familiar  story,  but  I  shall  not  attempt  here 
a  narration  of  it.  This  work  eventuated  in  war,  and  with 
the  opening  of  war,  Mr.  Douglas  was  quickly  found  in  the 
attitude  of  a  leader  in  the  cause  of  the  Union  —  the  closing, 
and  the  noblest  episode  of  his  whole  remarkable  career. 

I  knew  Senator  Douglas  quite  well.  Of  course,  he  was 
considerably  older  than  I,  and  was  one  of  the  great  men  of 
the  Nation,  while  I  was  just  starting  in  public  life.  I 
knew  him  before  the  Civil  War.  He  was  a  wonderful  man 
with  the  people.  I  do  not  think  there  was  ever  a  man  in 
public  life  who  was  more  thoroughly  loved  by  the  party  to 
which  he  belonged  than  Senator  Douglas.  His  adherents 
were  devoted  to  him  at  all  times  and  under  all  circum 
stances.  When  he  came  through  the  State,  the  whole  Demo 
cratic  party  was  alive  and  ready  to  rally  to  his  support. 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     63 

I  heard  him  deliver  addresses  on  two  occasions  before  the 
War.  I  heard  one  of  the  Lincoln-Douglas  debates  at  Ot 
tawa.  I  heard  Lincoln  deliver  the  famous  Springfield  ad 
dress,  in  which  he  uttered  the  immortal  sentiment,  "A  house 
divided  against  itself  cannot  stand."  To  this  address 
Douglas  afterwards  replied.  When  Lincoln  was  inaugu 
rated,  Douglas  was  present  on  the  platform  and  held  Lin 
coln's  hat  while  he  delivered  his  inaugural  address;  the  tre 
mendous  significance  of  which  trivial  act  can  be  appreciated 
only  in  the  light  of  later  years. 

But  Douglas  did  not  hesitate  for  a  moment  after  Fort 
Sumter  was  fired  upon,  April  12,  1861.  He  voluntarily 
called  upon  President  Lincoln  and  tendered  his  support  to 
the  cause  of  the  Union,  and  immediately  gave  out  to  the 
Associated  Press  a  statement,  calling  upon  the  people  of 
the  North,  regardless  of  party,  to  rally  to  its  defence. 

I  believe  it  was  Mr.  Lincoln  who  asked  him  to  visit 
Illinois,  where,  especially  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State, 
there  was  considerable  disunion  sentiment.  There  was  a 
great  effort  to  induce  the  region  where  the  Democracy  pre 
dominated,  the  people  being  loyal  followers  of  Douglas,  to 
go  with  the  South  instead  of  the  North.  Douglas  alone 
could  save  it.  He  came  to  Illinois,  as  he  told  me,  partly 
on  that  account;  to  rally  the  State  to  the  support  of  the 
Union,  earnestly  desiring  that  the  country  should  under 
stand  where  he  stood. 

He  visited  Springfield  while  the  Legislature  was  in  ses 
sion.  Senator  Douglas  was  invited  to  address  a  joint  ses 
sion  of  that  body,  which  he  did  on  the  evening  of  April  25, 
1861.  Being  Speaker  of  the  House,  I  presided.  In  addi 
tion  to  the  members  of  the  Legislature,  there  was  a  great 
crowd  present. 

I  have  a  vivid  recollection  of  the  evening.     Prior  to  that 


64      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

time  I  had  not  believed  in  Senator  Douglas ;  which  was  only 
natural,  I  having  been  a  Whig  and  an  enthusiastic  adherent 
of  Lincoln.  The  duty  of  introducing  Senator  Douglas  to 
the  joint  Assembly  devolved  upon  myself;  I  cannot  at  this 
late  day  recall  the  words  I  used,  but  I  am  sure  that  I  pre 
sented  him  in  as  complimentary  a  manner  as  my  prejudices 
allowed. 

As  he  continued  speaking,  however,  I,  as  thousands  — 
nay,  millions  —  of  others  had  done,  succumbed  to  the  magic 
of  his  eloquence  and  the  irresistible  logic  of  his  brilliant 
mind;  and  I  must  here  confess  that  never  before  or  since 
have  I  heard  a  more  masterful,  a  more  inspired,  plea  for  the 
integrity  of  the  Union  and  the  indivisibility  of  the  Nation 
than  Senator  Douglas  delivered  upon  that  occasion. 

It  seemed  to  me,  as  he  hurled  the  thunders  of  his  eloquence 
broadcast,  that  the  very  rafters  rang  in  harmony,  that  the 
air  vibrated  in  accord  with  his  denunciations  of  rebellion. 

The  address  was  not  a  long  one.  As  it  was  printed  by 
order  of  the  General  Assembly,  I  shall  take  the  liberty  of 
presenting  it  in  full : 

"MR.  SPEAKER,  AND  GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  SENATE  AND  HOUSE  OF  REP 
RESENTATIVES:  I  am  not  insensible  to  the  patriotic  motives  which  have 
prompted  you  to  do  me  the  honor  to  invite  me  to  address  you  on  the  mo 
mentous  issues  now  presented  in  the  condition  of  our  country.  With  a 
heart  filled  with  sadness  and  grief,  I  proceed  to  comply  with  your  request. 

"For  the  first  time  since  the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  a 
widespread  conspiracy  exists  to  destroy  the  best  government  the  sun 
of  heaven  ever  shed  its  rays  upon.  Hostile  armies  are  now  marching 
upon  the  Federal  Capitol,  with  a  view  of  planting  a  revolutionary  flag 
upon  its  dome;  seizing  the  National  archives;  taking  captive  the  Presi 
dent  elected  by  the  votes  of  the  people,  and  holding  him  in  the  hands 
of  secessionists  and  disunionists.  A  war  of  aggression  and  of  extermi 
nation  is  being  waged  against  the  Government  established  by  our  fathers. 
The  boast  has  gone  forth  by  the  authorities  of  this  revolutionary  Gov- 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     65 

eminent  that  on  the  first  day  of  May  the  revolutionary  flag  shall  float 
from  the  walls  of  the  Capitol  at  Washington,  and  that  on  the  fourth 
day  of  July  the  Rebel  army  shall  hold  possession  of  the  Hall  of  Inde 
pendence  in  Philadelphia. 

"The  simple  question  presented  to  us  is,  whether  we  will  wait  for 
the  enemy  to  carry  out  his  boast  of  making  war  upon  our  soil;  or 
whether  we  will  rush  as  one  man  to  the  defence  of  the  Government 
and  its  capital,  and  defend  it  from  the  hands  of  all  assailants  who  have 
threatened  to  destroy  it.  Already  the  piratical  flag  has  been  unfurled 
against  the  commerce  of  the  United  States.  Letters  of  marque  have 
been  issued,  appealing  to  the  pirates  of  the  world  to  assemble  under 
that  revolutionary  flag  and  commit  depredations  on  the  commerce  car 
ried  on  under  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  The  navigation  of  our  great  river 
into  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  is  obstructed.  Hostile  batteries  have  been 
planted  upon  its  banks;  custom  houses  have  already  been  established; 
and  we  are  required  now  to  pay  tribute  and  taxes,  without  having  a  voice 
in  making  the  laws  imposing  them,  or  having  a  share  in  the  proceeds 
after  they  have  been  collected.  The  question  is,  whether  this  war  of 
aggression  shall  proceed,  and  we  remain  with  folded  arms,  inattentive 
spectators;  or  whether  we  shall  meet  the  aggressors  at  the  threshold  and 
turn  back  the  tide  of  revolution  and  usurpation. 

"So  long  as  there  was  a  hope  of  peaceful  solution,  I  prayed  and 
implored  for  compromise.  I  can  appeal  to  my  countrymen  with  con 
fidence  that  I  have  spared  no  effort,  omitted  no  opportunity,  to  secure 
a  peaceful  solution  of  all  these  troubles,  and  thus  restore  peace,  happi 
ness,  and  fraternity  to  the  country.  When  all  propositions  of  peace  fail, 
and  a  war  of  aggression  is  proclaimed,  there  is  but  one  course  left  for 
the  patriot,  and  that  is  to  rally  under  that  flag  which  has  waved  over 
the  capitol  from  the  days  of  Washington,  and  around  the  Government 
established  by  Washington,  Madison,  Hamilton,  and  their  compeers. 

"What  is  the  alleged  cause  for  this  invasion  of  the  rights  and  au 
thority  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States?  The  cause  alleged  is 
that  the  institutions  of  the  Southern  States  are  not  safe  under  the 
Federal  Government.  What  evidence  has  been  presented  that  they  are 
insecure?  I  appeal  to  every  man  within  the  sound  of  my  voice  to  tell 
me  at  what  period  from  the  time  that  Washington  was  inaugurated 
down  to  this  hour,  have  the  rights  of  the  Southern  States  —  the  rights 
of  the  slave-holders  —  been  more  secure  than  they  are  at  this  moment  ? 

5 


66      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

When  in  the  whole  history  of  this  Government  have  they  stood  on  so 
firm  a  basis?  For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  this  republic,  there 
is  no  restriction  by  act  of  Congress  upon  the  institution  of  slavery,  any 
where  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States.  Then  it  cannot  be  the 
Territorial  question  that  has  given  them  cause  for  rebellion.  When  was 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  executed  with  more  fidelity  than  since  the  in 
auguration  of  the  present  incumbent  of  the  Presidential  office?  Let  the 
people  of  Chicago  speak  and  tell  us  when  were  the  laws  of  the  land 
executed  with  as  much  firmness  and  fidelity,  so  far  as  the  fugitive  slaves 
are  concerned,  as  they  are  now.  Can  any  man  tell  me  of  any  one  act 
of  aggression  that  has  been  committed  or  attempted  since  the  last 
Presidential  election,  that  justifies  this  violent  disruption  of  the  Federal 
Union  ? 

"I  ask  you  to  reflect,  and  then  point  out  any  one  act  that  has  been 
done  —  any  one  duty  that  has  been  omitted  to  be  done  —  of  which  any 
one  of  these  disunionists  can  justly  complain.  Yet  we  are  told,  sim 
ply  because  a  certain  political  party  has  succeeded  in  a  Presidential 
election,  they  choose  to  consider  that  their  liberties  are  not  safe,  and 
therefore  they  are  justified  in  breaking  up  the  Government. 

"I  had  supposed  that  it  was  a  cardinal  and  fundamental  principle  of 
our  system  of  government  that  the  decision  of  the  people  at  the  ballot 
box,  without  fraud,  according  to  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  was  to 
command  the  implicit  obedience  of  every  good  citizen.  If  defeat  at  a 
Presidential  election  is  to  justify  the  minority,  or  any  portion  of  the 
minority,  in  raising  the  traitorous  hand  of  rebellion  against  the  con 
stituted  authorities,  you  will  find  the  future  history  of  the  United  States 
written  in  the  history  of  Mexico.  According  to  my  reading  of  Mexican 
history,  there  has  never  been  one  presidential  term,  from  the  time  of  the 
Revolution  of  1820  down  to  this  day,  when  the  candidate  elected 
by  the  people  ever  served  his  four  years.  In  every  instance,  either 
the  defeated  candidate  has  seized  upon  the  Presidential  chair  by  the 
use  of  the  bayonet,  or  he  has  turned  out  the  duly  elected  President 
before  his  term  expired.  Are  we  to  inaugurate  this  Mexican  sys 
tem  in  the  United  States  of  America?  Suppose  the  case  to  be  reversed. 
Suppose  the  disunion  candidate  had  been  elected  by  any  means  —  I 
care  not  what,  if  by  any  means  in  accordance  with  the  forms  of  the 
Constitution  —  at  the  last  Presidential  election;  then,  suppose  the  Re 
publicans  had  raised  a  rebellion  against  his  authority  —  in  that  case 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     67 

you  would  have  found  me  tendering  my  best  efforts  and  energies  to 
John  C.  Breckinridge  to  put  down  the  Republican  rebels.  And  if  you 
had  attempted  such  a  rebellion  I  would  have  justified  him  in  calling 
forth  all  the  power  and  energies  of  this  country  to  have  crushed  you  out. 

"The  first  duty  of  an  American  citizen,  or  of  a  citizen  of  any  constitu 
tional  Government,  is  obedience  to  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  his 
country.  I  have  no  apprehension  that  any  man  in  Illinois,  or  beyond  the 
limits  of  our  own  beloved  State,  will  misconstrue  or  misunderstand 
my  motive.  So  far  as  any  of  the  partisan  questions  are  concerned,  I 
stand  in  equal,  irreconcilable,  and  undying  opposition  both  to  the  Repub 
licans  and  the  secessionists.  You  all  know  that  I  am  a  very  good  par 
tisan  fighter  in  partisan  times,  and  I  trust  you  will  find  me  equally  as 
good  a  patriot  when  the  country  is  in  danger. 

"Now  permit  me  to  say  to  the  assembled  Representatives  and  Senators 
of  our  beloved  State,  composed  of  men  of  both  political  parties,  in  my 
opinion  it  is  your  duty  to  lay  aside,  for  the  time  being,  your  party  creeds 
and  party  platforms;  to  dispense  with  your  party  organizations  and 
partisan  appeals;  to  forget  that  you  were  ever  divided,  until  you  have 
rescued  the  Government  and  the  country  from  their  assailants.  When 
this  paramount  duty  shall  have  been  performed,  it  will  be  proper  for 
each  of  us  to  resume  our  respective  political  positions  according  to  our 
convictions  of  public  duty.  Give  me  a  country  first,  that  my  children 
may  live  in  peace;  then  we  will  have  a  theatre  for  our  party  organiza 
tions  to  operate  upon. 

"Are  we  to  be  called  upon  to  fold  our  arms,  allow  the  national  capital 
to  be  seized  by  a  military  force  under  a  foreign  revolutionary  flag;  to 
see  the  archives  of  the  Government  in  the  hands  of  a  people  who  affect 
to  despise  the  flag  and  Government  of  the  United  States?  I  am  not 
willing  to  be  expelled  by  military  force,  nor  to  fly  from  the  Federal 
capitol.  It  has  been  my  daily  avocation  six  months  in  the  year,  for 
eighteen  years,  to  walk  into  that  marble  building,  and  from  its  portico 
to  survey  a  prosperous,  happy,  and  united  country  on  both  sides  of 
the  Potomac.  I  believe  I  may  with  confidence  appeal  to  the  people  of 
every  section  of  the  country  to  bear  testimony  that  I  have  been  as  thor 
oughly  national  in  my  political  opinions  and  actions  as  any  man  that 
has  lived  in  my  day.  And  I  believe  if  I  should  make  an  appeal  to 
the  people  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  or  of  the  Northern  States,  for  their 
impartial  verdict,  they  would  say  that  whatever  errors  I  have  com- 


68      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

mitted  have  been  in  leaning  too  far  to  the  Southern  section  of  the 
Union  against  my  own.  I  think  I  can  appeal  to  friend  and  foe  —  I 
use  the  term  in  a  political  sense,  and  I  trust  I  use  the  word  foe  in  a 
past  sense  —  I  can  appeal  to  them  with  confidence,  that  I  have  never 
pandered  to  the  prejudice  or  passion  of  my  section  against  the  minority 
section  of  this  Union;  and  I  will  say  to  you  now,  with  -all  frankness 
and  in  all  sincerity,  that  I  will  never  sanction  nor  acquiesce  in  any  war 
fare  whatever  upon  the  constitutional  rights  or  domestic  institutions 
of  the  people  of  the  Southern  States.  On  the  contrary,  if  there  was  an 
attempt  to  invade  those  rights  —  to  stir  up  servile  insurrection  among 
their  people  —  I  would  rush  to  their  rescue,  and  interpose  with  what 
ever  of  strength  I  might  possess  to  defend  them  from  such  a  calamity. 
While  I  will  never  invade  them  —  while  I  will  never  fail  to  defend  and 
protect  their  rights  to  the  full  extent  that  a  fair  and  liberal  construc 
tion  of  the  Constitution  can  give  them  —  they  must  distinctly  under 
stand  that  I  will  never  acquiesce  in  their  invasion  of  our  constitutional 
rights. 

"It  is  a  crime  against  the  inalienable  and  indefeasible  rights  of  every 
American  citizen  to  attempt  to  destroy  the  Government  under  which 
we  were  born.  It  is  a  crime  against  constitutional  freedom  and  the 
hopes  of  the  friends  of  freedom  throughout  the  wide  world  to  attempt 
to  blot  out  the  United  States  from  the  map  of  Christendom.  Yet  this 
attempt  is  now  being  made.  The  Government  of  our  fathers  is  to  be 
overthrown  and  destroyed.  The  capital  that  bears  the  name  of  the  Fa 
ther  of  his  Country  is  to  be  bombarded  and  levelled  with  the  earth 
among  the  rubbish  and  the  dust  of  things  that  are  past.  The  records 
of  your  Government  are  to  be  scattered  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven. 
The  constituted  authorities,  placed  there  by  the  same  high  authority  that 
placed  Washington  and  Jefferson  and  Madison  and  Jackson  in  the  chair, 
are  to  be  captured  and  carried  off,  to  become  a  byword  and  a  scorn  to 
the  nations  of  the  world. 

"You  may  think  that  I  am  drawing  a  picture  that  is  overwrought. 
No  man  who  has  spent  the  last  week  in  the  city  of  Washington  will 
believe  that  I  have  done  justice  to  it.  You  have  all  the  elements  of 
the  French  Revolution  surrounding  the  capital  now,  and  threatening 
it  with  its  terrors.  Not  only  is  our  constitutional  Government  to  be 
stricken  down;  not  only  is  our  flag  to  be  blotted  out;  but  the  very  foun 
dations  of  social  order  are  to  be  undermined  and  destroyed;  the  demon 
of  destruction  is  to  be  let  loose  over  the  face  of  the  land,  a  reign  of 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     69 

terror  and  mob  law  is  to  prevail  in  each  section  of  the  Union,  and  the 
man  who  dares  to  plead  for  the  cause  of  justice  and  moderation  in 
either  section  is  to  be  marked  down  as  a  traitor  to  his  section.  If  this 
state  of  things  is  allowed  to  go  on,  how  long  before  you  will  have  the 
guillotine  in  active  operation? 

"I  appeal  to  you,  my  countrymen  —  men  of  all  parties  —  not  to  allow 
your  passions  to  get  the  better  of  your  judgment.  Do  not  allow  your 
vengeance  upon  the  authors  of  this  great  iniquity  to  lead  you  into  rash, 
and  cruel,  and  desperate  acts  upon  loyal  citizens  who  may  differ  with 
you  in  opinion.  Let  the  spirit  of  moderation  and  of  justice  prevail. 
You  cannot  expect,  within  so  few  weeks  after  an  excited  political  canvass, 
that  every  man  can  rise  to  the  high  and  patriotic  level  of  forgetting  his 
partisan  prejudices  and  sacrifice  everything  upon  the  altar  of  his  coun 
try;  but  allow  me  to  say  to  you,  whom  I  have  opposed  and  warred 
against  with  an  energy  you  will  respect  —  allow  me  to  say  to  you,  you 
will  not  be  true  to  your  country  if  you  ever  attempt  to  manufacture 
partisan  capital  out  of  the  misfortunes  of  your  country.  When  calling 
upon  Democrats  to  rally  to  the  tented  field,  leaving  wife,  child,  father, 
and  mother  behind  them  to  rush  to  the  rescue  of  the  President  that 
you  elected,  do  not  make  war  upon  them  and  try  to  manufacture  partisan 
capital  at  their  expense  out  of  a  struggle  in  which  they  are  engaged  from 
the  holiest  and  purest  of  motives. 

"Then  I  appeal  to  you,  my  own  Democratic  friends  —  those  men  that 
have  never  failed  to  rally  under  the  glorious  banner  of  the  country 
whenever  an  enemy  at  home  or  abroad  has  dared  to  assail  it  —  to  you 
with  whom  it  has  always  been  my  pride  to  act  —  do  not  allow  the 
mortification,  growing  out  of  defeat  in  a  partisan  struggle,  and  the 
elevation  of  a  party  to  power  that  we  firmly  believe  to  be  dangerous  to 
the  country  —  do  not  let  that  convert  you  from  patriots  into  traitors 
to  your  native  land.  Whenever  our  Government  is  assailed,  when  hos 
tile  armies  are  marching  under  new  and  odious  banners  against  the 
Government  of  our  country,  the  shortest  way  to  peace  is  the  most 
stupendous  and  unanimous  preparations  for  war.  The  greater  unanimity, 
the  less  blood  will  be  shed.  The  more  prompt  and  energetic  the  move 
ment,  and  the  more  imposing  in  numbers,  the  shorter  will  be  the  struggle. 
''Every  friend  of  freedom  —  every  champion  and  advocate  of  con 
stitutional  liberty  throughout  the  land  —  must  feel  that  this  cause  is 
his  own.  There  is  and  should  be  nothing  disagreeable  or  humiliating 
to  men  who  have  differed  in  times  of  peace  on  every  question  that  could 


70      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

divide  fellow  men,  to  rally  in  concert  in  defence  of  the  country  and 
against  all  assailants.  While  all  the  States  of  this  Union,  and  every 
citizen  of  every  State  has  a  priceless  legacy  dependent  upon  the  suc 
cess  of  our  efforts  to  maintain  this  Government,  we  in  the  great  valley 
of  the  Mississippi  have  peculiar  interests  and  inducements  to  the  strug 
gle.  What  is  the  attempt  now  being  made?  Seven  States  of  the  Union 
chose  to  declare  that  they  will  no  longer  obey  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States;  that  they  will  withdraw  from  the  Government  estab 
lished  by  our  fathers;  that  they  will  dissolve  without  our  consent  the 
bonds  that  have  united  us  together.  But,  not  content  with  that,  they 
proceed  to  invade  and  obstruct  our  dearest  and  most  inalienable  rights, 
secured  by  the  Constitution.  One  of  their  first  acts  is  to  establish  a 
battery  of  cannon  upon  the  banks  of  the  Mississippi,  on  the  dividing  line 
between  the  States  of  Mississippi  and  Tennessee,  and  require  every 
steamer  that  passes  down  the  river  to  come  to  under  their  guns  to  re 
ceive  a  custom-house  officer  on  board,  to  prescribe  where  the  boat  may 
land  and  upon  what  terms  it  may  put  out  a  barrel  of  flour  or  a  cask 
of  bacon. 

"We  are  called  upon  to  sanction  this  policy.  Before  consenting  to 
their  right  to  commit  such  acts,  I  implore  you  to  consider  that  the  same 
principle  which  will  allow  the  cotton  States  to  exclude  us  from  the 
ports  of  the  gulf,  would  authorize  the  New  England  States  and  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  to  exclude  us  from  the  Atlantic,  and  the  Pa 
cific  States  to  exclude  us  from  the  ports  of  that  ocean.  Whenever  you 
sanction  this  doctrine  of  secession,  you  authorize  the  States  bordering 
upon  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  Oceans  to  withdraw  from  us,  form  alli 
ances  among  themselves,  and  exclude  us  from  the  markets  of  the 
world  and  from  communication  with  all  the  rest  of  Christendom.  Not 
only  this,  but  there  follows  a  tariff  on  imports,  levying  taxes  upon  every 
pound  of  tea  and  coffee  and  sugar  and  every  yard  of  cloth  that  we  may 
import  for  our  consumption;  the  levying  too  of  an  export  duty  upon 
every  bushel  of  corn  and  every  pound  of  meat  we  may  choose  to  send  to 
the  markets  of  the  world  to  pay  for  our  imports. 

"Bear  in  mind  that  these  very  cotton  States,  who  in  former  times  have 
been  so  boisterous  in  their  demands  for  free  trade,  have,  among  their 
first  acts,  established  an  export  duty  on  cotton  for  the  first  time  in  Amer 
ican  history. 

"It  is  a  historical  fact,  well  known  to  every  man  who  has  read  the 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     71 

debates  of  the  convention  which  framed  the  Constitution,  that  the  South 
ern  States  refused  to  become  parties  to  the  Constitution  unless  there 
was  an  express  provision  in  the  Constitution  prohibiting  Congress  to 
levy  an  export  duty  on  any  product  of  the  country.  No  sooner  have 
these  cotton  States  seceded  than  an  export  duty  is  levied,  and  if  they 
will  levy  it  on  their  own  cotton  do  you  not  think  they  will  levy  it  on 
our  pork  and  our  beef  and  our  corn  and  our  wheat  and  our  manu 
factured  articles,  and  all  we  have  to  sell?  Then  what  is  the  proposi 
tion?  It  is  to  enable  the  tier  of  States  bordering  on  the  Atlantic  and 
the  Pacific  and  on  the  Gulf,  surrounding  us  on  all  sides,  to  withdraw 
from  our  Union,  form  alliances  among  themselves,  and  then  levy  taxes 
on  us  without  our  consent,  and  collect  revenues  without  giving  us  any 
just  proportion  or  any  portion  of  the  amount  collected.  Can  we  sub 
mit  to  taxation  without  representation?  Can  we  permit  nations  foreign 
to  us  to  collect  revenues  off  our  products,  the  fruits  of  our  industry?  I 
ask  the  citizens  of  Illinois  —  I  ask  every  citizen  in  the  great  basin 
between  the  Rocky  Mountains  and  the  Alleghenies,  in  the  valley  of  the 
Ohio,  Mississippi,  and  Missouri  to  tell  me  whether  he  is  willing  to  sanc 
tion  a  line  of  policy  that  may  isolate  us  from  the  markets  of  the  world 
and  make  us  dependent  provinces  upon  powers  that  thus  choose  to  sur 
round  and  hem  us  in? 

"I  warn  you,  my  countrymen,  whenever  you  permit  this  to  be  done  in 
the  Southern  States,  New  York  will  very  soon  follow  their  example. 
New  York  —  that  great  port  where  two-thirds  of  all  our  revenue  is  col 
lected,  and  whence  two-thirds  of  our  products  are  exported,  will  not 
long  be  able  to  resist  the  temptation  of  taxing  fifteen  millions  of  peo 
ple  in  the  great  West,  when  she  can  monopolize  the  resources  and  release 
her  own  people  thereby  from  any  taxation  whatsoever.  Hence  I  say 
to  you,  my  countrymen,  from  the  best  consideration  I  have  been  able 
to  give  to  this  subject,  after  the  most  mature  reflection  and  thorough 
investigation,  I  have  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that,  come  what  may, — 
war  if  it  must  be,  although  I  deplore  it  as  a  great  calamity, —  yet,  come 
what  may,  the  people  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  can  never  consent  to  be 
excluded  from  free  access  to  the  ports  of  the  Atlantic,  the  Pacific,  and 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico. 

"Hence,  I  repeat,  that  while  I  am  not  prepared  to  take  up  arms  or  to 
sanction  war  upon  the  rights  of  the  Southern  States,  upon  their  domestic 
institutions,  upon  their  rights  of  person  or  property,  but,  on  the  con- 


72      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

trary,  would  rush  to  their  defence  and  protect  them  from  assault,  I 
will  never  cease  to  urge  my  countrymen  to  take  up  arms  and  to  fight 
to  the  death  in  defence  of  our  indefeasible  rights. 

"Hence,  if  a  war  does  come,  it  will  be  a  war  of  self-defence  on  our  part. 
It  will  be  a  war  in  defence  of  our  own  just  rights;  in  defence  of  the 
Government  which  we  have  inherited  as  a  priceless  legacy  from  our  pa 
triotic  fathers;  in  defence  of  those  great  rights  of  the  freedom  of  trade, 
commerce,  transit,  and  intercourse  from  the  centre  to  the  circumference 
of  our  great  continent.  These  are  rights  we  can  never  surrender. 

"I  have  struggled  almost  against  hope  to  avert  the  calamities  of  war 
and  to  effect  a  reunion  and  reconciliation  with  our  brethren  of  the  South. 
I  yet  hope  it  may  be  done,  but  I  am  not  able  to  point  out  to  you  how 
it  may  be  effected.  Nothing  short  of  Providence  can  reveal  to  us  the 
issue  of  this  great  struggle.  Bloody  —  calamitous  —  I  fear  it  will  be. 
May  we  so  conduct  it  if  a  collision  must  come,  that  we  will  stand  justi 
fied  in  the  eyes  of  Him  who  knows  our  hearts  and  who  will  judge  our 
every  act.  We  must  not  yield  to  resentments,  nor  to  the  spirit  of  ven 
geance,  much  less  to  the  desire  for  conquest  or  ambition. 

"I  see  no  path  of  ambition  open  in  a  bloody  struggle  for  triumph  over 
my  own  countrymen.  There  is  no  path  for  ambition  open  for  me  in 
a  divided  country,  after  having  so  long  served  a  united  and  glorious 
country.  Hence,  whatever  we  may  do  must  be  the  result  of  conviction, 
of  patriotic  duty  —  the  duty  that  we  owe  to  ourselves,  to  our  posterity, 
and  to  the  friends  of  constitutional  liberty  and  self-government  through 
out  the  world. 

"My  friends,  I  can  say  no  more.  To  discuss  these  topics  is  the  most 
painful  duty  of  my  life.  It  is  with  a  sad  heart  —  with  a  grief  that  I 
have  never  before  experienced,  that  I  have  to  contemplate  this  fear 
ful  struggle;  but  I  believe  in  my  conscience  that  it  is  a  duty  we  owe 
ourselves  and  our  children  and  our  God,  to  protect  this  Government  and 
that  flag  from  every  assailant,  be  he  who  he  may." 

Of  all  the  members  of  that  joint  assembly  who  listened  to 
the  eloquence  of  Senator  Douglas  that  evening,  forty-nine 
years  ago,  aside  from  Dr.  William  Jayne  of  Springfield, 
and  myself,  I  do  not  know  of  a  single  one  now  living. 

After  he  concluded  his  address,  the  joint  session  of  the 
Legislature  dissolved.  He  and  I  remained  together  in  con- 


LINCOLN  AND  DOUGLAS  NOMINATED     73 

versation,  and  I  accompanied  him  to  his  hotel.  During  that 
talk  he  expressed  to  me  the  great  anxiety  which  he  felt  for 
the  safety  of  the  country  and  the  preservation  of  the  Union. 
I  am  satisfied  that  it  was  his  ambition  to  enter  the  army  and 
possibly  lead  it  in  suppressing  the  Rebellion.  What  would 
have  been  the  result  in  that  case,  no  one  can  tell;  but  I  am  in 
clined  to  think  that  he  would  have  made  a  very  great  general. 

Senator  Douglas's  Springfield  speech  had  a  tremendous 
effect  on  public  opinion.  It  brought  his  followers,  and  they 
were  legion  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  to  the  support  of 
the  Government  and  the  North. 

Senator  Douglas  went  from  Springfield  to  Chicago, 
where  he  delivered  another  eloquent  address,  along  the  same 
lines  as  the  one  delivered  at  Springfield,  to  tens  of  thou 
sands  of  people.  Very  soon  thereafter  he  was  taken  ill  with 
pneumonia  and  passed  away. 

He  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  intellect.  He  did  his 
full  part,  at  one  of  the  most  critical  periods  in  our  history, 
in  saving  the  Nation.  His  speeches  in  and  out  of  Congress 
are  among  the  most  able  and  eloquent  delivered  by  any 
American  statesman. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SPEAKER   OF   THE   ILLINOIS    LEGISLATURE   AND   A    MEMBER 

OF    CONGRESS 

1860  TO  1865 

THE  election  of  Mr.  Lincoln  was  made  the  pretext  for 
secession.  It  has  always  seemed  to  me  that  the  South 
was  determined  to  secede  no  matter  at  what  cost;  and  it  has 
also  seemed  to  me  that  this  determination  was  not  due  to  the 
great  body  of  the  people  of  the  South,  than  whom  there  were 
no  better,  but  to  the  jealous  politicians  of  that  section,  who 
saw  the  gradual  growth  in  wealth  and  power  of  the  Northern 
States  threaten  their  domination  of  the  National  Govern 
ment,  which  they  had  firmly  held  since  the  days  of  Washing 
ton.  They  saw  that  domination  slipping  away,  and  they 
determined  to  form  a  nation  of  their  own  —  in  which  slavery, 
indeed,  would  be  paramount;  but  it  was  not  so  much  slavery 
as  it  was  their  own  desire  for  control  that  influenced  them. 

As  soon,  therefore,  as  Mr.  Lincoln  was  elected  President 
they  began  the  organization  of  a  Government  of  their  own. 
President  Buchanan  declared  in  his  message  that  the  South 
ern  States  had  no  right  to  secede  — "unless  they  wanted  to," 
as  some  one  aptly  expressed  it;  in  other  words,  that  he  had 
no  right  under  the  Constitution  to  keep  them  forcibly  in  the 
Union,  and  thus  the  constitutional  opinions  of  the  President 
harmonized  effectively  with  the  purposes  of  the  secessionists. 
Fortunate  it  was  that  Mr.  Buchanan  had  so  short  a  term  re 
maining  after  the  election  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  Had  a  year  or 

74 


SPEAKER  AND  CONGRESSMAN  75 

two  elapsed,  the  Confederacy  would  have  been  firmly  and 
irrevocably  established. 

It  has  never  been  quite  clear  to  my  mind  whether  Mr. 
Buchanan  cared  to  preserve  the  Union  or  not.  In  the  heat 
and  passion  of  that  day,  we  all  thought  he  was  a  traitor. 
As  I  look  back  now  and  think  of  it,  remembering  his  long 
and  distinguished  service  to  the  country  in  almost  every 
capacity  —  as  a  legislator,  as  a  diplomat,  as  Secretary  of 
State,  as  President,  I  think  now  he  was  only  weak.  His 
term  was  about  expiring,  and  he  saw  and  feared  the  awful 
consequences  of  a  civil  war. 

One  State  after  another  seceded ;  the  United  States'  arms 
and  arsenals  were  seized ;  on  January  9,  the  Star  of  the  West, 
carrying  supplies  to  Fort  Sumter,  was  fired  upon  and 
driven  off.  South  Carolina,  Mississippi,  Florida,  Alabama, 
Georgia,  Louisiana,  and  Texas  went  out.  The  Confederate 
States  of  America  were  organized  in  the  capital  of  Alabama 
on  the  fourth  of  February,  and  Jefferson  Davis  was  elected 
President. 

We  watched  with  great  interest  the  famous  Peace  Con 
ference  which  met  in  Washington  and  over  which  John 
Tyler,  ex-President  of  the  United  States,  presided.  It  sat 
during  the  month  of  February,  preceding  Mr.  Lincoln's 
inauguration,  and  recommended  the  adoption  of  seven  ad 
ditional  articles  to  the  Constitution,  which  were  afterwards 
rejected  by  the  Senate  of  the  United  States. 

But  the  fourth  of  March  finally  came,  and  new  life  was 
infused  into  the  national  councils. 

Mr.  Lincoln's  speeches  on  his  way  East  were  a  disap 
pointment,  in  that  they  failed  in  the  least  to  abate  the  rising 
Southern  storm;  the  calmly  firm  tone  of  his  inaugural  ad 
dress  impressed  the  North,  but  his  appeals  to  the  South  were 
in  vain.  Said  he: 


76      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"I  declare  that  I  have  no  purpose,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  inter 
fere  with  the  institution  of  slavery  in  the  States  where  it  exists.  .  .  . 
The  Union  of  these  States  is  perpetual.  It  is  safe  to  assert  that  no 
Government  proper  ever  had  a  provision  in  its  organic  law  for  its  own 
termination.  The  power  confided  to  me  will  be  used  to  hold,  occupy, 
and  possess  the  property  and  places  belonging  to  the  Government  and 
to  collect  the  duties  and  imposts." 

It  was  a  notable  appeal  that  he  made,  in  closing,  to  the 
Southerners : 

"In  your  hands,  my  dissatisfied  fellow  countrymen,  and  not  in  mine,  is 
the  momentous  issue  of  civil  war.  The  Government  will  not  assail  you. 
You  can  have  no  conflict  without  being  yourselves  the  aggressors.  You 
have  no  oath  registered  in  heaven  to  destroy  the  Government,  while  I 
shall  have  the  most  solemn  one  to  'preserve,  protect,  and  defend  it.' 

"I  am  loath  to  close.  We  are  not  enemies,  but  friends.  We  must  not 
be  enemies.  Though  passion  may  have  strained  it  must  not  break 
our  bonds  of  affection.  The  mystic  chords  of  memory,  stretching  from 
every  battlefield  and  patriot  grave  to  every  living  heart  and  hearthstone 
all  over  this  broad  land,  will  yet  swell  the  chorus  of  the  union,  when 
again  touched,  as  surely  they  will  be,  by  the  better  angels  of  our  nature." 

At  the  same  time  that  Mr.  Lincoln  was  first  elected  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  States,  I  was  for  the  second  time  elected 
to  the  Legislature  of  Illinois.  I  received  the  vote  of  what 
they  called  the  Republicans,  or  Free-soil  men,  and  of  those 
who  were  previously  known  as  Fillmore  men.  I  was  always 
in  thorough  accord  with  Mr.  Lincoln  in  political  sentiment, 
though  I  had  supported  Fillmore  rather  than  Fremont  in 
1856.  I  most  heartily  supported  Lincoln's  candidacy,  and 
as  candidate  for  the  Legislature  received  more  votes  than 
Mr.  Lincoln  received  in  Sangamon  County.  Douglas  car 
ried  the  county  as  against  Lincoln,  and  I  carried  it  as  against 
my  opponent.  There  was  great  enthusiasm  for  Mr.  Lincoln 
in  the  county,  but  he  was  so  positive  and  outspoken  in  his 
convictions  on  the  slavery  question  that  he  failed  to  get  a 


SPEAKER  AND  CONGRESSMAN  77 

considerable  number  of  votes ;  many  went  to  other  Republi 
cans  who  did  not  express  their  views  so  vigorously  as  he  did. 
Of  course,  what  he  lost  at  home  because  of  zeal  and  earnest 
ness  in  his  cause,  was  more  than  made  up  to  him  on  the  wider 
field  covered  by  his  candidacy. 

Stephen  A.  Hurlbut  was  a  member  of  that  Legislature, 
and  afterwards  became  a  prominent  general  in  the  army. 
I  might  say  that  General  Hurlbut  and  Lawrence  Church 
were  two  very  strong  men,  both  from  the  northern  part  of 
the  State,  and  both  became  prominent  in  the  public  service. 
I  might  say  also  that  but  for  those  two  men,  who  put  me 
forward  as  a  candidate  for  the  Speakership,  I  probably 
would  not  have  become  a  candidate.  On  the  Saturday  night 
before  the  Monday  on  which  the  Legislature  was  to  con 
vene,  they  pressed  me  so  strongly  that  I  consented,  and 
became  the  nominee  of  my  party  associates.  J.  W.  Single 
ton  was  the  Democratic  nominee.  Before  the  Legislature 
convened,  and  during  the  intervening  Sunday,  a  feeling 
got  abroad  among  the  older  members  of  the  Legislature  that 
I  was  too  young  to  be  trusted  in  such  a  responsible  position 
as  that  of  Speaker.  When  I  came  down-town  on  Sunday 
I  found  that  feeling  prevailing. 

I  at  once  took  notice  of  it,  and  stated  that  if  there  was 
any  feeling  that  I  had  done  wrong  in  becoming  a  candidate, 
I  would  submit  the  question  to  another  test  of  the  sense  of 
the  Republicans  in  the  Legislature,  and  if  they  thought  I 
ought  not  to  have  the  position  I  would  cheerfully  yield  to 
their  judgment.  The  caucus  was  called  together  Monday 
morning,  and  I  stated  that  I  had  heard  that  there  was  some 
dissatisfaction,  and  I  desired  to  have  another  vote.  A 
vote  was  accordingly  taken,  and  I  was  again  nominated, 
and  by  a  larger  vote  than  in  the  first  instance;  whereupon 
the  older  men  gave  in,  and  I  was  duly  elected,  receiving 


78      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

thirty-nine  votes  to  twenty-nine  cast  for  the  Democratic 
candidate. 

I  think  I  made  more  friends,  in  the  conduct  of  the  office 
of  Speaker  during  that  term,  than  I  ever  did  afterwards; 
and  in  subsequent  campaigns  I  was  frequently  gratified  to 
find  men,  some  of  them  Democrats,  who  had  been  in  the 
Legislature  with  me  at  that  time,  working  for  me  with  a 
stronger  zeal  and  earnestness  because  of  the  associations  and 
intimate  relations  there  formed  and  cemented.  All  classes, 
Republicans  and  Democrats  alike,  took  occasion  to  manifest 
their  satisfaction,  and  some  who  became  my  friends  there 
continued  so  as  long  as  they  lived.  I  think,  of  all  that 
Legislature,  I  am  the  only  one  left. 

A  little  incident  occurred  at  a  reception  given  by  Mr. 
Lincoln  after  he  was  elected  President,  but  before  he  left 
his  home  to  come  to  Washington,  that  vitally  affected  my 
life.  In  speaking  to  the  President,  I  expressed  a  desire  to 
visit  Washington  while  he  was  President  of  the  United 
States.  He  replied  heartily:  "Mr.  Speaker,  come  on." 
And  that  was  about  the  origin  of  my  thinking  seriously  that 
I  would  like  to  come  to  Washington  as  a  member  of  Con 
gress. 

The  more  I  thought  of  the  idea,  the  more  interested  I  be 
came,  and  I  so  shaped  matters  during  that  session  of  the 
Legislature  as  to  secure  a  district  in  which  some  Republican 
could  hope  to  be  elected.  In  the  apportionment  under  the 
census  of  1860,  I  had  our  Congressional  district  elongated 
to  the  north  and  south  rather  than  to  the  east  and  west,  and 
let  it  be  known  that  I  would  be  a  candidate. 

But  when  the  time  came  for  a  nomination  the  Hon.  Leon 
ard  Swett,  who  was  then  a  prominent  lawyer  and  politician, 
also  took  the  field  to  secure  the  Republican  nomination.  He 
visited  Springfield,  and  persuaded  some  of  his  friends  there 


SPEAKER  AND  CONGRESSMAN  79 

that  he  ought  to  be  the  nominee,  and  they  determined  to 
try  their  hands  toward  securing  my  withdrawal,  if  possible 
by  persuasion.  They  sent  for  me  to  come  to  the  library, 
where  they  were  proposing  to  hold  a  meeting.  I  went  over, 
and  found  that  their  project  was  to  get  me  to  withdraw  in 
favor  of  Swett,  and  I  declined.  But  I  said  I  would  "draw 
straws,"  or  assent  to  any  other  fair  means  that  could  be 
found  by  which  it  was  to  be  settled  who  was  to  be  the  nom 
inee  of  the  party.  Then,  after  some  further  parleying,  I 
finally  left  the  conference. 

That  evening  after  dusk  I  met  Swett  on  the  street.  We 
sat  down  upon  the  curbstone,  as  it  was  growing  a  little  dark, 
and  talked  the  matter  over.  Swett  said  to  me  that  he  was 
an  older  man  than  I  was ;  that  he  had  been  knocked  about  a 
good  deal,  and,  though  he  had  done  much  work  for  the 
party,  he  had  never  got  anything ;  and  if  the  present  oppor 
tunity  for  reward  for  services  were  allowed  to  pass  him  by 
another  opportunity  was  not  likely,  at  his  age,  to  come  to 
him.  Finally  I  said:  "Mr.  Swett,  if  you  had  come  to  me 
and  made  this  suggestion  at  first,  I  would  have  been  very 
glad  indeed  to  make  the  concession  to  you,  and  I  am  ready 
to  do  so  now.  Here  is  my  hand  on  it,  and  I  will  help  you  at 
the  convention."  He  became  the  party  candidate  by  gen 
eral  consent,  as  I  remember  it.  At  all  events  he  was  the 
candidate,  and  unfortunately  he  was  beaten  at  the  polls. 
That  was  in  1862.  So  that  while  the  Congressional  district 
was  made  by  me,  and  for  myself,  I  gave  way  to  Mr.  Swett, 
and  the  opposition  carried  it.  Two  years  afterwards  I  was 
the  candidate  and  was  elected. 

The  majority  in  the  counties  composing  the  district  was 
ordinarily  Republican.  As  a  result  of  Mr.  Swett's  defeat, 
he  left  the  district,  though  a  very  prominent  lawyer,  and 
went  to  Chicago,  never  to  return  to  the  Congressional  district 


80      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

in  which  he  had  lived  so  many  years,  really  quitting  politics 
entirely. 

I  suppose  I  ought  to  state  the  fact  that,  having  made  the 
district  for  myself  and  then  given  it  up  to  Mr.  Swett,  I  de 
termined  to  be  a  candidate  at  the  next  election;  whereupon 
I  found  that  Mr.  James  C.  Conkling,  a  friend  of  mine,  and 
a  special  friend  of  Mr.  Lincoln  also,  some  of  whose  fam 
ily  are  still  living,  was  disposed  to  try  for  the  same  office. 
I  made  up  my  mind  that  in  order  to  keep  myself  in  trim  for 
the  future  it  was  well  to  keep  in  touch  with  the  voters;  so 
I  determined  to  run  for  the  State  Senate,  though  the  four 
counties  composing  the  Senatorial  district  were  all  Demo 
cratic  and  all  in  the  Congressional  district  in  which  Swett 
was  the  defeated  candidate,  yet  I  desired  to  run  for  the 
Senate,  in  order  to  keep  Conkling  from  getting  such  a  hold 
on  the  district  as  to  strengthen  him  for  the  contest  two  years 
afterwards. 

So  I  made  the  run,  and  was  beaten,  of  course,  every 
county  in  the  district  being  Democratic;  and  the  rest  of  my 
plans  also  worked  out  as  I  had  calculated  they  would. 

Soon  after  I  was  elected  to  Congress,  and  soon  after  Mr. 
Lincoln  was  elected  the  second  time,  I  came  on  to  Washing 
ton.  Having  been  intimate  with  Mr.  Nicolay  and  Mr.  Hay, 
who  were  his  secretaries,  I  was  in  the  habit  of  frequenting 
their  rooms  without  ceremony.  One  evening,  just  after 
dusk,  I  went  to  the  White  House  and  quietly,  as  usual,  en 
tered  Nicolay's  room.  It  so  happened  that  Mr.  Lincoln 
and  Mr.  Seward,  with  some  other  cabinet  officers,  were  in 
the  room,  holding  a  consultation.  I  had  opened  the  door 
before  I  observed  who  were  there.  President  Lincoln  saw 
me  quite  as  soon  as  I  saw  him,  and  I  was  very  much  embar 
rassed.  He  sang  out  cheerily,  "Come  in!  "  and  turning  to 
his  Secretary  of  State,  he  added,  "Seward,  you  remember 


SPEAKER  AND  CONGRESSMAN  81 

my  old  friend  Stuart?  Here  is  the  boy  that  beat  him."  I 
stayed  for  only  a  moment,  and  then  went  out.  That  is  the 
nearest  I  ever  came  to  participating  in  a  cabinet  meeting. 

That  incident  in  my  life,  as  I  now  look  back,  punctuates, 
in  my  individual  way  of  thinking  at  this  moment,  the  sub 
stantial  close  of  what  was  mortal  in  that  great  man's  earthly 
career.  The  close  of  the  four  years  of  civil  war  was  clearly 
in  sight.  It  was  in  many  respects  a  record-making  and  a 
record-breaking  war.  The  navies  of  the  world,  rendered 
helpless  by  the  incidental  effects  of  its  thundering  guns,  had 
to  be  rebuilt.  For  the  first  time  in  the  world's  history  the 
railroad  and  the  electric  telegraph  played  a  very  considerable 
part.  The  grip  of  insatiate  despotism  on  Democratic  insti 
tutions  was  effectually  loosened  far  and  wide.  For  the  first 
time  in  war  the  lessons  taught  in  the  art  of  warfare  by  Alex 
ander  and  Cgesar  were  utterly  ignored,  and  the  "Maxims  of 
Napoleon"  were  relegated  to  the  shelf,  there  to  gather  dust. 
In  short,  it  inaugurated  a  new  era  in  the  history  not  only  of 
our  own  country  but  of  the  entire  world. 


CHAPTER  VII 

LINCOLN 

1860  TO  1864 

AS  days  and  years  pass  by  and  an  enlightened  humanity 
studies  and  comprehends  the  real  greatness  and  sim 
plicity  of  Abraham  Lincoln,  he  comes  nearer  and  becomes 
dearer  to  all.  No  weak  compliment  of  words  can  add  to 
his  renown,  nor  will  any  petty  criticism  detract  from  the 
glory  which  has  crowned  his  memory.  The  passing  of  time 
has  only  added  brightness  to  his  character;  the  antagonisms 
of  bitter  war  have  left  no  shade  upon  his  name;  and  the 
hatred  which,  for  a  brief  time,  spent  itself  in  harmless  words 
has  turned  to  reverence  and  love. 

Had  he  lived  until  February  12,  1911,  he  would  have  been 
one  hundred  and  two  years  old.  Less  than  forty-five  years 
ago,  in  the  very  prime  of  life,  he  was  the  Chief  Magistrate 
of  the  Nation,  guiding  and  controlling  it  in  its  great  strug 
gle  for  national  existence.  Such  a  vast  accumulation  of 
history  has  been  compressed  into  those  years,  and  such  a  won 
derful  panorama  of  events  has  passed  before  us  in  that  com 
paratively  brief  time,  that  we  are  apt  to  think  of  Lincoln 
as  of  the  long  ago,  as  almost  a  contemporary  of  Washing 
ton  and  of  the  Revolutionary  fathers.  The  immensity  of 
the  history  which  has  been  crowded  into  those  forty-five 
years  has  distorted  our  mental  vision,  as  ordinary  objects  are 
sometimes  distorted  by  refraction.  Yet  when  we  reflect,  the 
distortion  disappears.  But  the  wonder  still  remains.  The 

82 


LINCOLN  83 

years  during  which  the  deeds  of  Lincoln  have  been  a  memory 
to  us  do  not  carry  us  back  to  the  early  days  of  our  own 
country.  They  do  not  carry  us  back  even  to  the  time  of 
Jackson,  Webster,  Clay,  or  Calhoun;  yet  the  sacred  halo  of 
patriotic  veneration  invests  as  completely  the  name  of  Lin 
coln  as  of  Washington. 

The  many  personal  memories  of  the  martyred  patriot  that 
I  can  recall  seem  almost  a  dream  to  me.  It  seems  almost 
a  vision  of  the  unsubstantial  imagination,  when  I  think  that 
I  have  known  the  one  immortal  man  of  the  century,  and 
enjoyed  his  friendship.  He  was  the  very  impersonation  of 
humanity ;  his  stature  was  above  and  beyond  all  others.  One 
hand  reached  back  to  the  very  portals  of  Mount  Vernon, 
while  the  other,  giving  kindly  protection  to  the  oppressed, 
still  reaches  forward  to  guide,  encourage,  and  sustain  the 
people  of  this  Nation. 

It  was  my  great  good-fortune  to  know  something  of 
Abraham  Lincoln  from  the  time  I  was  about  twelve  years 
old,  and  even  earlier  than  that  I  have  a  distinct  recollection 
of  hearing  my  father  advising  men  to  employ  Lincoln  in 
important  litigation.  Lincoln  at  that  time  was  about  thirty 
years  old,  and  even  then  was  regarded  as  a  really  great 
lawyer. 

The  first  time  I  ever  saw  him  in  court  he,  assisted  by  Colo 
nel  E.  D.  Baker  (afterwards  a  senator  from  Oregon,  and 
killed  at  Balls  Bluff) ,  was  engaged  in  the  defence  of  a  man 
on  trial  for  murder.  The  conduct  of  the  defence  made  by 
those  great  lawyers  produced  an  impression  on  my  mind  that 
will  never  be  forgotten.  Lincoln  became  then  my  ideal  of  a 
great  man,  and  has  so  remained  ever  since. 

In  1846,  Mr.  Lincoln  was  the  Whig  candidate  for 
Congress,  and  it  was  then  that  I  first  heard  him  deliver  a 
political  speech.  The  county  in  which  my  father  resided 


84       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

was  a  part  of  his  Congressional  district.  When  Lincoln 
came  to  the  county  my  father  met  him  with  his  carriage  and 
took  him  to  all  his  appointments.  I  went  to  the  meeting 
nearest  my  home  —  an  open-air  meeting  held  in  a  grove. 
On  being  introduced,  he  began  his  speech  as  follows:  "Fel- 
law  citizens,  ever  since  I  have  been  in  Tazewell  County  my 
old  friend,  Major  Cullom,  has  taken  me  around;  he  has 
heard  all  my  speeches,  and  the  only  way  I  can  hope  to  fool 
the  old  Major  and  make  him  believe  I  am  making  a  new 
speech  is  by  turning  it  end  for  end  once  in  a  while." 

When  I  determined  to  abandon  the  hard  work  on  the 
farm  to  enter  the  study  of  law  at  Springfield,  my  father 
being  so  close  to  Mr.  Lincoln,  I  went  to  him  for  advice. 
He  expressed  a  willingness  to  take  me  into  his  own  office  as 
a  student,  but  said  that  he  was  absent  on  the  circuit  so  much 
that  he  would  advise  me  to  enter  the  law  office  of  Stuart  and 
Edwards,  two  prominent  Springfield  lawyers,  of  whom  I 
have  written  more  at  length  in  an  earlier  chapter.  There  I 
would  have  the  advantage  of  the  constant  supervision  of  one 
or  the  other  member  of  the  firm. 

From  that  time  until  he  left  Springfield  never  to  return, 
I  had  constant  means  of  observing  Lincoln  as  a  lawyer.  I 
was  at  times  associated  with  him  as  a  junior  counsel  in  the 
trial  of  law  suits.  I  was  employed  in  a  murder  case  which 
Lincoln  and  Logan  were  defending,  I  being  the  boy  lawyer 
in  the  case.  They  made  a  wonderful  defence.  I  do  not 
know  whether  the  defendant  was  guilty  or  not,  but  I  do 
know  that  he  was  acquitted. 

During  my  life  I  have  been  acquainted  with  very  many 
able  lawyers,  and  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  Lincoln 
was  the  greatest  trial  lawyer  I  ever  knew.  He  was  a  man 
of  wonderful  power  before  a  court  or  jury.  When  he  was 
sure  he  was  right,  his  strength  and  resourcefulness  were 


LINCOLN  85 

well-nigh  irresistible.  In  the  court-room  he  was  at  home. 
He  was  frank  with  the  court,  the  juries,  and  the  lawyers,  to 
such  an  extent  that  he  would  state  the  case  of  the  opposite 
side  as  fairly  as  the  opposing  counsel  could  do  it;  he  would 
then  disclose  his  client's  case  so  strongly,  with  such  honesty 
and  candor,  that  the  judge  and  jury  would  be  almost  con 
vinced  at  once  in  advance  of  the  testimony.  Judge  Davis 
once  said  that  the  framework  of  Lincoln's  mental  and  moral 
being  was  honesty,  and  that  a  wrong  cause  was  poorly  de 
fended  by  him. 

The  story  is  told  that  a  man  offered  to  employ  him  in  a 
case  and  told  him  the  facts,  which  did  not  satisfy  Lincoln 
that  there  was  any  merit  in  it.  He  said  to  him:  "I  can  gain 
your  case;  I  can  set  a  whole  neighborhood  at  loggerheads; 
I  can  distress  a  widowed  mother  and  six  fatherless  children, 
and  thereby  get  for  you  six  hundred  dollars,  which  it  ap 
pears  to  me  as  rightfully  belongs  to  them  as  to  you.  I  will 
not  take  your  case,  but  I  will  give  you  a  little  advice  for  noth 
ing.  You  seem  to  be  a  sprightly  young  man,  and  I  advise 
you  to  try  your  hand  at  making  six  hundred  dollars  in  some 
other  way." 

Mr.  Lincoln  was  for  a  time  employed  by  the  Illinois  Cen 
tral  Railroad  as  one  of  its  attorneys.  In  a  case  in  one  of 
the  counties  of  Judge  Davis's  circuit  to  which  the  railroad 
was  a  party,  it  was  announced  that  the  company  was  not 
ready  for  trial,  and  the  court  inquired  the  reason;  to  which 
Mr.  Lincoln  replied  that  Captain  McClellan  was  absent. 
The  court  asked,  "Who  is  Captain  McClellan?"  Lincoln 
replied  that  all  he  knew  about  him  was  that  he  was  the  en 
gineer  of  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad. 

What  a  strange  juggling  of  destiny  and  of  fate !  In  little 
more  than  two  years  McClellan's  fame  had  become  world 
wide  as  the  general  in  charge  of  all  the  armies  of  the  Re- 


86       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

public,  only  to  prove  in  the  estimation  of  many  people  the 
most  stupendous  failure  as  a  commander  in  all  our  military 
history;  Davis  had  become  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States;  and  Lincoln  had  reached  the  Presi 
dency. 

In  the  trial  of  the  murder  case  to  which  I  have  referred, 
I  never  saw  more  striking  evidence  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  power 
over  a  court.  There  came  a  question  of  the  advisability  of 
certain  testimony  which  was  very  vital  to  the  defendant. 
The  question  was  thoroughly  argued  by  Judge  Logan  and 
Mr.  Lincoln  until  the  court  took  a  recess  for  dinner  at  noon. 
The  Judge  announced  that  he  would  render  his  decision 
when  the  court  reconvened.  The  courthouse  was  filled  on 
the  reconvening  of  court  in  the  afternoon,  and  the  Judge 
began  rendering  his  opinion  on  the  point  in  dispute.  It 
seemed  to  Mr.  Lincoln  and  those  present  that  he  was  about 
to  decide  against  the  admissibility  of  the  evidence.  Lin 
coln  sprang  to  his  feet.  Apparently  he  towered  over  the 
Judge,  overawing  him.  He  made  such  a  tremendous  im 
pression  that  the  court  apparently  gave  way,  and  decided 
the  point  in  the  defendant's  favor. 

Mr.  Lincoln  was  not  only  a  great  statesman,  but  he  was 
one  of  the  ablest,  most  astute,  and  shrewdest  politicians  whom 
I  have  ever  known.  From  my  earliest  recollection  of  him 
he  took  keen  interest  in  public  affairs  and  was  the  foremost 
public  man  or  politician  in  his  section  of  the  State.  He  was 
not  among  the  first  to  join  the  Republican  party.  He  clung 
to  the  old  Whig  party  as  long  as  a  vestige  of  it  remained. 
Almost  immediately  after  he  drifted  into  the  Republican 
party,  he  became  its  recognized  leader  in  Illinois,  and  his 
public  utterances  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Nation  to 
him. 


LINCOLN  87. 

I  recollect  having  heard  him  utter  the  memorable  words 
in  the  Republican  Convention  of  my  State  in  1858: 

"A  house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand.  This  Government  can 
not  permanently  endure  half  slave  and  half  free.  I  do  not  expect  the 
Union  to  be  dissolved  —  I  do  not  expect  the  house  to  fall  —  but  I  do 
expect  that  it  will  cease  to  be  divided.  It  will  become  all  one  thing,  or 
all  the  other." 

What  words  of  wisdom!  He  looked  through  the  veil  be 
tween  him  and  the  future  and  saw  the  end  more  clearly  than 
any  other  man  in  public  life.  This  was  a  carefully  prepared 
speech,  in  which  every  word  was  weighed.  Some  of  his 
friends,  to  whom  it  was  read,  advised  him  not  to  use  the 
clause  I  have  quoted,  "a  house  divided  against  itself."  He 
was  wiser  than  any  of  them.  With  a  self-reliance  born  of 
earnest  conviction  he  said  that  the  time  had  come  when  the 
sentiments  should  be  uttered,  and  that  if  he  should  go  down 
because  of  their  utterance  by  him,  then  he  would  go  down 
linked  with  the  truth. 

I  listened  to  much  of  the  great  debate  between  Lincoln 
and  Douglas,  the  greatest  political  debate  which  ever  took 
place  in  this  country.  I  have  always  felt  that  Lincoln  never 
expected  to  be  elected  to  the  Senate  in  1858.  I  think  he 
saw  more  clearly  than  any  of  us  that  the  advanced  position 
which  he  took  in  that  debate  made  his  election  to  the  Senate 
at  that  time  impossible.  He  was  then  fighting  for  a  great 
principle.  He  did  carry  a  majority  of  the  popular  vote, 
but  Douglas  secured  a  majority  of  the  Legislature. 

His  defeat  apparently  affected  him  little,  if  at  all.  I  felt 
very  badly  when  it  became  apparent  that  Douglas  had  se 
cured  a  majority  of  the  Legislature.  I  met  Lincoln  on  the 
street  one  day,  and  said:  "Mr.  Lincoln,  is  it  true  that 
Douglas  has  a  majority  of  the  Legislature?"  His  reply 


88       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

was  an  affirmative.  I  then  expressed  the  great  sorrow  and 
disappointment  that  I  felt.  He  placed  a  hand  upon  my 
shoulder,  and  said:  "Never  mind,  my  boy;  it  will  all  come 
right."  I  believe  that  he  then  felt  certain  that  the  position 
he  took  in  that  memorable  debate  would  make  him  the  logi 
cal  candidate  of  the  Republican  party  for  the  Presidency 
in  1860,  which  it  did.  And  two  years  from  that  very  day  the 
Republican  party  celebrated  its  first  national  victory  in  his 
election  as  President  of  the  United  States. 

It  has  been  said  that  Mr.  Lincoln  never  went  to  school; 
and  he  never  did  to  any  great  extent,  but -in  a  broad  sense 
of  the  word,  he  was  an  educated  man.  He  was  a  student, 
a  thinker;  he  educated  himself,  and  mastered  any  question 
which  claimed  his  attention.  There  was  no  man  in  this 
country  who  possessed  to  a  greater  degree  the  power  of 
analyzation. 

He  was  a  student  all  his  life.  One  incident  that  oc 
curred  in  Springfield,  some  years  before  he  finally  left,  will 
serve  as  an  illustration. 

An  old  German  came  through  the  town  and  claimed 
that  he  could  teach  us  all  to  read  and  speak  German  in  a 
few  weeks.  A  class  was  organized  for  the  purpose  of 
studying  German.  Lincoln  became  a  member  of  the  class, 
and  I  also  was  in  it,  and  I  can  see  him  yet  going  about 
with  the  German  book  in  his  pocket,  studying  it  during  his 
leisure  moments  in  court  and  elsewhere.  None  of  the  rest 
of  us  learned  much,  but  Lincoln  mastered  it,  as  he  did  every 
other  subject  which  engaged  his  attention. 

His  home  life  was  a  pleasant  one.  I  often  visited  at  his 
home,  and  so  far  as  my  observation  went,  I  do  not  hes 
itate  to  say  that  not  the  slightest  credence  should  be  given 
to  the  many  false  stories  that  have  from  time  to  time  ap 
peared,  manufactured  largely  by  those  who  desired  to 


LINCOLN  89 

write  something  new  and  sensational  concerning  the  life  of 
President  Lincoln  in  his  home,  and  concerning  Mrs. 
Lincoln. 

Mr.  Lincoln  was  regarded  generally  as  an  ungainly  man, 
and  so  he  was;  and  yet  on  occasions  he  appeared  to  me  to 
be  superior  in  dignity  and  nobility  to  almost  any  other  man 
whom  I  have  ever  seen.  I  was  present  when  the  committee 
from  the  National  Convention,  that  gave  his  first  nomina 
tion  for  President,  came  to  Springfield  to  notify  him  of  his 
nomination.  He  stood  in  the  rear  of  a  double  parlor  in  his 
home,  and  as  the  Hon.  George  F.  Ashmon,  president  of  the 
convention,  presented  the  members  of  the  delegation  one  by 
one  to  him,  I  thought  that  he  looked  what  he  was  —  the  su 
perior  of  any  man  present.  Many  of  the  eminent  men 
composing  that  delegation  had  believed  that  Lincoln  was 
some  sort  of  a  monster.  I  stood  among  them  after  they 
had  met  him  and  listened  to  their  comments.  The  lofty 
character,  the  towering  strength,  the  majesty  of  the  man 
had  made  a  great  impression  upon  them.  They  had  come 
expecting  to  see  a  freak ;  they  discovered  one  of  the  princes 
of  men. 

In  this  connection,  I  must  be  permitted  to  refer  to  an 
other  occasion.  It  so  happened  that  I  was  in  Washington 
when  the  President's  son  Willie  died.  The  funeral  cere 
mony  took  place  in  the  East  Room  of  the  White  House, 
in  the  presence  of  the  President  and  his  cabinet  and  a  few 
other  friends.  When  the  ceremony  was  about  concluded 
and  President  Lincoln  stood  by  the  bier  of  his  dead  boy, 
with  tear-drops  falling  from  his  face,  surrounded  by 
Seward,  Chase,  Bates,  and  others,  I  thought  I  never  beheld  a 
nobler-looking  man.  He  was  at  that  time  truly,  as  he  ap 
peared,  a  man  of  sorrow,  acquainted  with  grief,  possessing 
the  power  and  responsibilities  of  a  President  of  a  great  Na- 


90      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tion,  yet  with  quivering  lips  and  face  bedewed  with  tears, 
from  personal  sorrow. 

The  morning  that  Abraham  Lincoln  left  his  home  in 
Springfield  never  to  return  is  not  to  be  forgotten.  It  was 
early  on  the  morning  of  the  eleventh  of  February,  dark  and 
gloomy,  with  a  light  snow  falling.  There  was  a  large  crowd 
of  his  neighbors  and  friends  at  the  station  to  bid  him  good 
bye.  He  held  a  sort  of  impromptu  reception  in  the  little 
railroad  station.  There  was  no  noisy  demonstration.  As  I 
recollect  it  now,  it  was  a  solemn  leave-taking.  Just  before 
the  train  pulled  out,  Mr.  Lincoln  appeared  on  the  rear  plat 
form  of  his  car.  Every  head  was  bared,  as  if  to  receive  a 
benediction,  as  he  uttered  his  farewell  address : 

"My  FRIENDS:  No  one  not  in  my  situation  can  appreciate  my  feeling 
of  sadness  at  this  parting.  To  this  place,  and  the  kindness  of  these 
people,  I  owe  everything.  Here  I  have  lived  a  quarter  of  a  century, 
and  have  passed  from  a  young  to  an  old  man.  Here  my  children  have 
been  born  and  one  is  buried.  I  now  leave,  not  knowing  when  or  whether 
ever  I  may  return,  with  a  task  before  me  greater  than  that  which  rested 
upon  Washington.  Without  the  assistance  of  that  Divine  Being  who 
ever  attended  him,  I  cannot  succeed;  with  that  assistance,  I  cannot  fail. 
Trusting  in  Him,  who  can  go  with  me,  and  remain  with  you,  and  be 
everywhere  for  good,  let  us  confidently  hope  that  all  will  yet  be  well. 
To  His  care  commending  you,  as  I  hope  in  your  prayers  you  will  com 
mend  me,  I  bid  you  an  affectionate  farewell." 

I  was  not  present  at  the  first  inauguration  of  President 
Lincoln,  but  I  visited  Washington  many  times  during  the 
years  that  he  was  President,  and,  knowing  him  as  well  as  I 
did,  and  having  known  both  Nicolay  and  Hay,  his  secre 
taries,  in  Springfield,  I  naturally  spent  much  time  around 
the  executive  offices.  I  had  many  conversations  with  him 
during  the  early  years  of  the  war.  He  had  no  military 
education,  but  he  soon  demonstrated  that  he  was  in  fact  the 


LINCOLN  91 

real  commander-in-chief .  He  liked  General  McClellan,  and 
stuck  to  him  until  McClellan  had  demonstrated  his  abso 
lute  inefficiency  for  command.  McClellan  was  a  great 
organizer.  He  made  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  the 
most  perfect  fighting  machine,  I  might  almost  say,  that 
was  ever  known  in  military  history.  But  there  he  stopped. 
He  could  organize,  but  he  could  not  and  did  not,  despite  the 
urging  and  the  anxiety  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  push  forward  his 
army  to  victory.  I  knew  something  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  anx 
iety  at  the  failure  of  McClellan  to  inaugurate  an  aggressive 
campaign. 

The  late  O.  M.  Hatch  of  Illinois  told  me  of  a  rather  in 
teresting  incident  which  occurred  on  one  occasion  when  the 
President,  accompanied  by  Mr.  Hatch,  visited  McClellan's 
army  a  few  days  prior  to  the  battle  of  Antietam  in  Sep 
tember,  1862.  They  spent  the  night  in  a  tent,  and,  rising 
very  early,  at  the  President's  suggestion  they  took  a  walk 
before  sunrise  about  the  great  camp,  inspecting  the  field, 
the  artillery,  the  quarters,  and  all  the  appurtenances  of  the 
army.  Lincoln  was  in  a  pensive  mood,  and  scarcely  a  word 
was  spoken.  Finally,  just  as  the  sun  was  rising,  they 
reached  a  commanding  point;  the  President  stopped,  placed 
his  left  hand  upon  Mr.  Hatch's  shoulder,  and  slowly  wav 
ing  his  right  in  the  direction  of  the  great  city  of  tents,  seri 
ously  inquired:  "Mr.  Hatch,  what  is  all  this  before  us?  " 

"Why,  Mr.  President,"  was  the  surprised  reply,  "this  is 
General  McClellan's  army." 

"No,  Mr.  Hatch,  no,"  returned  Lincoln  soberly,  "this 
is  General  McClellan's  body-guard." 

It  will  be  understood  what  these  utterances  signified :  they 
expressed  perfectly  the  prevailing  belief  that  McClellan  had 
failed  to  appreciate  the  purpose  for  which  that  magnificent 
fighting  machine  had  been  created. 


92      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

I  think  I  am  justified  in  saying  that  after  the  earlier  con 
tests  of  the  war  had  proven  that  great  soldiers  and  great 
generals  were  not  always  great  leaders,  President  Lincoln 
became  the  able  director,  the  actual  commander-in-chief 
of  the  forces  of  the  United  States.  He  planned  and  or 
dered  the  larger  movements  of  the  War,  and  he  held  the 
reins  above  and  about  all  his  armies,  scarcely  relaxing  his 
watchful  care  for  a  moment, —  until  events  demonstrated 
the  wisdom  with  which  he  confided  the  military  interests  of 
our  beloved  country  and  the  conduct  of  the  war  to  Ulysses 
S.  Grant. 

Some  of  us  remember  with  what  persistence  during  the 
Winter  of  1862  and  1863  many  newspapers  and  a  large 
share  of  the  Northern  people  joined  in  the  cry  of  "On  to 
Richmond!"  Censure  and  criticism  ran  riot  even  among 
Northern  Republicans.  In  a  three-line  memorandum  the 
President  showed  the  fallacy  of  that  outcry,  when  he  wrote : 
"Our  prime  object  is  the  enemy's  army  in  front  of  us,  and 
not  with  or  about  Richmond  at  all,  unless  it  be  incidental 
to  the  main  object."  At  a  later  day  he  said  to  Hooker: 
"I  think  Lee's  army,  and  not  Richmond,  is  your  sure  objec 
tive  point." 

Modest  and  simple  he  always  was,  never  seeking  power 
with  inordinate  ambition,  simply  that  he  might  use  power; 
still  he  was  never  afraid  to  assume  responsibility  when  it 
was  his  duty  to  assume  it. 

I  called  on  him  one  evening  at  the  Soldiers'  Home.  We 
spent  the  evening  together,  and  naturally  we  talked  of  the 
war.  He  discussed  almost  all  of  his  generals,  beginning 
with  McClellan.  At  that  time  McClellan  was  down  on  the 
James,  and  Pope  was  in  the  saddle  in  Virginia.  Pope,  he 
feared,  would  be  whipped,  unless  he  could  get  more  troops, 
and  he  was  trying  to  get  McClellan  back  in  order  to  save 


LINCOLN  93 

Pope.  At  that  time  he  had  not  yet  lost  his  faith  in  McClel- 
lan,  but  he  was  complaining  that  McClellan  was  never 
ready  for  battle.  After  making  all  possible  preparations, 
and  with  the  enemy  in  front,  he  would  overestimate  the 
size  of  the  enemy's  force,  and  demand  more  troops.  Yet 
Mr.  Lincoln  said  that  he  would  rather  trust  McClellan  to 
get  his  army  out  of  a  tight  place  than  any  other  general  that 
he  had. 

After  his  election  he  invited  his  principal  competitors  for 
the  nomination  to  enter  his  cabinet.  He  had  not  the 
slightest  jealousy  of  any  living  man.  He  was  not  afraid, 
as  some  of  our  Presidents  have  been,  to  have  his  cabinet  com 
posed  of  the  greatest  men  of  his  time.  He  was  a  bigger 
man  than  any  of  them,  and  no  thought  of  jealousy  ever 
entered  his  mind.  Both  Seward  and  Chase  fancied  they 
were  greater  men  than  Lincoln,  and  each  of  them,  at  the 
beginning  at  least,  entertained  the  idea  that  on  him  rested 
the  responsibility  of  the  administration.  Seward  felt  that 
he  should  have  been  the  nominee  of  his  party.  Chase  felt 
perfectly  sure  that  he,  and  not  Lincoln,  should  have  been 
President. 

Before  many  months  had  passed,  Seward  was  compelled 
to  acknowledge  that  Mr.  Lincoln  was  the  superior  of  any 
of  them,  as  he  expressed  it  in  a  letter  to  his  wife.  He  soon 
became  one  of  the  most  devoted  friends  and  loyal  supporters 
of  the  President.  The  publication  of  the  diary  of  Gideon 
Welles,  Secretary  of  the  Navy  from  1861  to  1865,  shows 
that  Mr.  Lincoln  was  the  leader  of  them  all,  and  was  in 
fact  the  real  head  of  every  department  of  his  administration. 

Chase  was  an  able  man,  and  loyal  to  the  Union;  but, 
unlike  Seward,  he  was  never  loyal  to  the  President  per 
sonally,  and  was  constantly  plotting  in  his  own  interest  to 
supplant  Lincoln  as  the  nominee  of  his  party  in  1864, —  a 


94      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

most  reprehensible  course  on  the  part  of  a  cabinet  officer. 
This  did  not  give  concern  to  Mr.  Lincoln  in  the  slightest 
degree.  He  cared  very  little  what  Mr.  Chase  said  or 
thought  of  him  personally,  so  long  as  he  was  doing  his  duty 
as  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

I  was  in  Washington  the  latter  part  of  February,  1864, 
before  he  was  nominated  the  second  time.  I  happened  to 
hear  of  the  Pomeroy  letter  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Chase,  and  I 
learned  with  amazement  that  Chase  was  conspiring  with  his 
friends  to  secure  the  nomination  for  the  Presidency,  and  was 
untrue  and  unloyal  to  his  chief.  I  felt  justly  indignant.  I 
saw  Mr.  Lincoln  and  talked  with  him  about  it  with  great 
earnestness.  I  told  him  that  Chase  should  be  turned  out. 
He  answered  by  saying:  "Let  him  alone ;  he  can  do  no  more 
harm  in  here  than  he  can  outside." 

If  things  did  not  go  to  suit  him,  Chase  was  in  the  habit 
of  tendering  his  resignation  every  few  days.  It  was  not 
accepted;  but  he  offered  it  once  too  often,  and,  very  much 
to  his  surprise  and  chagrin,  it  was  promptly  accepted;  and 
Chase  was  relegated  to  private  life,  where  he  belonged,  and 
where  he  should  have  remained. 

Chief  Justice  Taney  passed  away  unmourned,  the  most 
pathetic  and  desolate  figure  in  the  Civil  War,  with  his  long, 
faithful,  and  distinguished  service  on  the  bench  forgotten. 
Chase's  friends,  and  Chase  himself,  at  once  commenced  over 
tures  of  friendship  toward  Mr.  Lincoln,  in  the  interest, 
solely,  of  securing  Chase's  appointment  as  Chief  Justice. 
Considerable  pressure  was  brought  to  bear  in  behalf  of 
Chase.  The  President  would  give  no  intimation  as  to  what 
he  intended  to  do,  although  I  myself  believe  that  he  all  the 
time  intended  appointing  him  to  the  vacant  position,  and 
that  the  so-called  pressure  on  the  part  of  Sumner  and  other 
radicals  had  little,  if  any,  influence  with  him. 


LINCOLN  95 

During  this  period,  after  the  death  of  Chief  Justice 
Taney,  Chase  was  not  at  all  averse  to  writing  the  President 
the  most  friendly  letters.  One  day  his  secretary  brought 
him  a  letter  from  Mr.  Chase.  The  President  asked,  "What 
is  it  about? "  "Simply  a  kind  and  friendly  letter,"  the  sec 
retary  answered.  Mr.  Lincoln,  without  reading  it,  replied 
with  his  shrewd  smile:  "File  it  with  his  other  recommenda 
tions." 

Chase  was  finally  appointed  Chief  Justice  of  the  United 
States.  After  his  conduct  as  a  member  of  the  cabinet,  I 
do  not  believe  we  have  ever  had  another  President,  except 
Lincoln,  magnanimous  enough  to  have  made  that  appoint 
ment  under  similar  circumstances.  Lincoln  entertained  a 
very  exalted  opinion  of  Chase's  ability  as  a  lawyer  and  man. 
He  believed  that  he  possessed  the  qualifications  of  a  great 
Chief  Justice,  and  the  appointment  was  made  entirely  free 
from  any  personal  feelings  or  prejudices. 

I  happened  to  be  alone  in  Mr.  Nicolay's  room  in  the  White 
House  when  Mr.  Chase  called  to  thank  the  President  for 
his  nomination.  He  came  into  Mr.  Nicolay's  room  first, 
and  inquired  of  me  if  the  President  was  in.  I  told  him  I 
did  not  know,  but  his  room  was  next  to  the  one  we  were  in, 
and  he  might  ascertain  for  himself.  Knowing  of  Chase's 
disparaging  remarks  concerning  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  of  his  dis 
loyalty  as  a  member  of  his  cabinet,  I  was  very  curious  to  hear 
what  he  would  have  to  say  to  the  President.  He  left  the 
door  ajar,  and  I  overheard  the  conversation.  Mr.  Chase 
proceeded  to  thank  the  President  for  his  nomination.  Mr. 
Lincoln's  reply  was  brief,  merely  that  he  hoped  Mr.  Chase 
would  get  along  well  and  would  do  his  duty.  Very  few 
words  passed  between  them,  and  the  interview  closed. 

Montgomery  Blair  was  Postmaster-General  in  President 
Lincoln's  cabinet.  He  was  appointed  from  the  District  of 


96      FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Columbia.  He  was  a  man  of  considerable  ability,  and  was 
thoroughly  loyal  to  the  President.  Montgomery  Blair  be 
came  exceedingly  unpopular  among  certain  classes,  not  only 
on  his  own  account,  but  because  of  his  brother  Frank,  whose 
home  was  in  Missouri.  I  thought  his  remaining  in  the 
cabinet  was  injuring  the  Administration,  and  I  told  Mr.  Lin 
coln,  in  a  conversation  I  had  with  him  at  the  White  House, 
that  under  all  the  circumstances  Montgomery  Blair  should 
be  relieved  from  office;  that  he  was  unpopular;  that  the  peo 
ple  were  not  for  him.  Mr.  Lincoln  seemed  annoyed,  even  to 
the  extent  of  petulance  (a  rare  thing  with  him),  that  I 
should  say  anything  against  Montgomery  Blair.  He  as 
serted  that  Blair  was  a  loyal  man,  was  doing  his  full  duty 
as  Postmaster-General,  and  that  he  would  not  turn  him  out. 

Later,  Montgomery  Blair,  always  loyal  under  all  circum 
stances,  told  the  President  that  he  was  ready  to  tender  his 
resignation  whenever,  in  the  judgment  of  the  President,  his 
remaining  in  the  cabinet  would  be  an  embarrassment;  and 
Mr.  Lincoln  in  a  very  kindly  note  sometime  afterwards 
said  that  he  felt  himself  compelled  to  accept  Mr.  Blair's 
offer  and  ask  for  his  resignation.  They  continued  personal 
friends  until  the  President's  death. 

The  year  1862,  on  account  of  the  proclamation  of  Presi 
dent  Lincoln,  in  September,  that  he  would  free  the  slaves 
in  those  States  or  parts  of  States  whose  people  continued 
in  rebellion  on  and  after  January  1,  1863,  was  a  disastrous 
year  to  the  Republican  party;  but  the  final  effect  of  the 
proclamation  was  beneficial  to  the  cause  of  the  Union.  It 
stimulated  greater  enthusiasm  on  the  part  of  those  who  de 
sired  to  see  the  end  of  slavery  in  this  country.  Many  people 
so  hated  that  institution  that  they  were  more  desirous  of  hav-1 
ing  it  abolished  than  to  have  the  Union  preserved  with  it. 

While  President  Lincoln  was  always  opposed  to  slavery, 


LINCOLN  97 

unequivocally  opposed  to  it,  yet  his  oath  called  upon  him  to 
preserve  the  Constitution  and  the  Union.  He  said  that  his 
paramount  object  was  to  save  the  Union  and  not  to  save 
or  destroy  slavery. 

In  1862  President  Lincoln  appointed  three  men,  namely, 
Governor  George  S.  Bout  well,  the  Hon.  Stephen  T.  Logan, 
and  the  Hon.  Charles  A.  Dana,  a  commission  to  go  to  Cairo, 
Illinois,  and  settle  the  claims  of  numerous  persons  against 
the  Government,  arising  from  property  purchased  by  com 
missary  officers  and  quartermasters  in  the  volunteer  service 
before  the  volunteers  knew  anything  about  military  rules  or 
regulations.  Judge  Logan  went  to  Cairo,  remained  a  few 
days,  became  ill,  tendered  his  resignation,  and  returned 
home.  The  President  telegraphed  me  an  appointment,  and 
asked  me  to  go  at  once  to  Cairo  for  duty,  which  I  did.  I 
had  not  known  either  Boutwell  or  Dana  before.  The  com 
mission  finished  its  work  in  about  a  month,  and  forwarded 
to  Washington  all  papers,  with  its  report.  The  claims  were 
paid  on  the  basis  of  our  allowance,  and  justice  was  done  to 
all  concerned. 

Early  in  1862  an  old  friend  of  President  Lincoln's,  James 
Lamb,  came  to  see  me,  stating  that  he  had  been  furnishing 
beef  cattle  to  the  army ;  that  he  had  received  orders  to  furnish 
a  given  number  on  hoof  at  a  certain  place  in  the  South,  which 
he  had  done ;  but  before  his  cattle  arrived  the  army  had  gone, 
and  he  had  thereby  suffered  great  loss.  He  asked  me  to 
look  after  his  claim  when  I  went  to  the  National  capital,  and 
I  agreed  to  do  so.  I  knew  nothing  about  such  things  in 
Washington,  nor  how  such  business  with  the  Government  was 
transacted.  I  went  to  the  President  as  the  only  official  with 
whom  I  was  acquainted,  and  stated  to  him,  "Uncle  Jimmie 
Lamb,  your  old  friend,  has  a  claim,"  setting  forth  the  same 
in  full.  "You  know  he  is  a  good  man,"  I  urged,  "and  he 


98       FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

ought  to  have  his  money."  Lincoln  answered  me  by  saying: 
"Cullom,  there  is  this  difference  in  dealing  between  two  indi 
viduals  and  between  an  individual  and  the  Government :  if  an 
individual  does  not  do  as  he  agreed  and  the  other  person  is 
injured  thereby,  he  can  sue  the  one  responsible  for  the  injury, 
and  recover  damages;  but  in  the  case  of  the  Government, 
if  it  does  not  do  right,  the  individual  can't  help  himself." 
He  gave  me  a  note,  however,  to  the  proper  officer  and  the 
matter  was  arranged. 

The  gossip  around  the  Capitol  in  Washington  among 
Senators  and  Representatives  is  a  very  poor  gauge  of  public 
sentiment  in  the  country  toward  a  President.  I  was  in 
Washington  a  few  months  before  the  second  nomination. 
I  talked  with  numerous  Representatives  and  Senators,  and 
it  really  seemed  to  me  as  if  there  was  hardly  any  one  in  favor 
of  the  renomination  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  I  felt  much  dis 
couraged  over  the  circumstance.  When  I  was  about  to 
leave  for  home,  I  called  at  the  White  House.  I  asked  the 
President  if  he  permitted  anybody  to  talk  to  him  about  him 
self.  He  replied  that  he  did.  I  said:  "I  would  like  to  talk 
to  you  about  yourself."  He  asked  me  to  be  seated.  Where 
upon  I  told  him  that  I  had  been  in  Washington  some  ten 
days  or  more,  and  that  everybody  seemed  to  be  against  him. 

"Well,  it  is  not  quite  so  bad  as  that,"  he  said.  He  took 
down  his  directory,  and  I  soon  discovered  that  he  had  a  far 
more  intimate  knowledge  of  the  situation  than  I  had.  He 
had  every  one  marked,  knew  how  he  stood,  and  the  list  made 
a  better  showing  than  I  had  expected. 

The  truth  is,  however,  that  many  of  the  strong  men  in 
Congress,  especially  the  radicals,  were  against  his  renomina 
tion,  and  would  have  rejoiced  to  see  some  one  else  the 
nominee  of  the  party;  but  they  knew  full  well,  that  the  great 


LINCOLN  99 

body  of  the  people  of  the  North  were  with  him,  and  that 
it  would  be  useless  to  attempt  to  prevent  his  renomination. 

The  next  time  I  called  at  the  White  House  after  the  con 
vention,  he  reminded  me  of  our  previous  conversation,  and 
remarked  that  it  did  not  turn  out  so  badly  after  all. 

He  was  reminded  of  a  little  story.  A  couple  of  Irishmen 
came  to  America  and  started  out  on  foot  into  the  country. 
They  travelled  along  until  they  came  to  a  piece  of  woods. 
They  thought  they  heard  a  noise,  but  did  not  know  what  it 
was.  They  deployed  on  either  side  of  the  road  to  find  out, 
but  were  unable  to  do  so,  and  finally  one  called  to  the 
other,  "Pat,  Pat,  let 's  go  on;  this  is  nothing  but  a  domned 
noise."  So  the  opposition  to  him,  he  said,  was  apparently 
nothing  but  a  noise. 

But  if  he  never  had  any  doubts  as  to  his  renomination, 
he  at  one  time  almost  despaired  of  being  reflected,  as  did 
many  of  his  closest  and  most  intimate  friends.  The  Demo 
crats  had  not  yet  selected  their  candidates,  and  as  he  re 
marked:  "At  this  period  we  had  no  adversary,  and  seemed  to 
have  no  friends." 

An  incident  in  this  connection  is  related  by  the  late  Sec 
retary,  John  Hay.  The  President  felt  that  the  campaign 
was  going  against  him,  and  he  had  made  up  his  mind 
deliberately  as  to  the  course  he  should  pursue.  He  resolved 
to  lay  down  for  himself  a  course  of  action  demanded  by  his 
then  conviction  of  duty.  He  wrote  on  the  twenty-third  of 
August  the  following  memorandum: 

"This  morning,  as  for  some  days  past,  it  seems  exceedingly  prob 
able  that  this  administration  will  not  be  reflected.  Then  it  will  be  my 
duty  to  so  cooperate  with  the  President-elect  as  to  save  the  Union  be 
tween  the  election  and  the  inauguration;  as  he  will  have  secured  his  elec 
tion  on  such  grounds  that  he  cannot  possibly  save  it  afterwards." 


100     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

He  then  folded  and  pasted  the  sheet  in  such  manner  that 
its  contents  could  not  be  read,  and  as  the  cabinet  came  to 
gether  he  handed  this  paper  to  each  member  successively, 
requesting  him  to  write  his  name  across  the  back  of  it,  without 
intimating  to  any  member  of  the  cabinet  what  the  note  con 
tained.  In  this  manner  he  pledged  himself  to  accept 
loyally  the  anticipated  verdict  of  the  people  against  him. 

Mr.  Hay's  diary  relates  what  took  place  at  the  next  cabinet 
meeting  after  the  election,  as  follows: 

"At  the  meeting  of  the  cabinet  to-day  the  President  took  out  a  paper 
from  his  desk  and  said:  'Gentlemen,  do  you  remember  last  summer  I 
asked  you  all  to  sign  your  names  to  the  back  of  a  paper  of  which  I 
did  not  show  you  the  inside?  This  is  it.  Now,  Mr.  Hay,  see  if  you 
can  open  this  without  tearing  it.'  He  had  pasted  it  up  in  so  singular 
a  style  that  it  required  some  cutting  to  get  it  open.  He  then  read  this 
memorandum  (quoted  above). 

"The  President  said:  'You  will  remember  that  this  was  written  at 
the  time,  six  days  before  the  Chicago  nominating  convention,  when  as 
yet  we  had  no  adversary  and  seemed  to  have  no  friends.  I  then  sol 
emnly  resolved  on  the  course  of  action  indicated  in  this  paper.  I  re 
solved  in  case  of  the  election  of  General  McClellan,  being  certain  that 
he  would  be  the  candidate,  that  I  would  see  him  and  talk  matters  over 
with  him.  I  would  say,  "General,  the  election  has  demonstrated  that 
you  are  stronger,  have  more  influence  with  the  American  people  than 
I.  Now  let  us  together,  you  with  your  influence,  and  I  with  all  the 
executive  power  of  the  Government,  try  to  save  the  country.  You  raise 
as  many  troops  as  you  possibly  can  for  the  final  trial,  and  I  will  devote 
all  my  energies  to  assist  and  finish  the  war."  ' 

"Seward  said:  'And  the  General  would  have  answered  you,  "Yes, 
yes/'  and  the  next  day  when  you  saw  him  again  and  pressed  these  views 
upon  him,  he  would  have  said,  "Yes,  yes,"  and  so  on  forever,  and  would 
have  done  nothing  at  all.' 

"  'At  least,'  rejoined  Lincoln,  'I  should  have  done  my  duty  and  have 
stood  clear  before  my  own  conscience.'  " 

Not  the  least  of  his  troubles  and  embarrassments  during 
the  trying  period  preceding  his  second  election  was  the  over- 


LINCOLN  101 

zealous  advice, —  persistence,  I  might  say  --on  the  part, &f 
certain  New  Yorkers  and  New  Englanders  who  seemed  to 
think  that  they  had  the  interest  of  the  Union  and  the  country 
more  at  heart  than  had  Mr.  Lincoln. 

Horace  Greeley  was  one  of  the  most  troublesome  of  this 
lot.  He  was  an  honest  and  a  most  loyal  man,  but  was  willing 
to  temporize  upon  the  most  vital  questions.  At  one  time  he 
advised  that  the  "erring  sisters  "  should  be  permitted  to  de 
part  in  peace.  At  this  particular  time  of  which  I  speak  he 
had  devised  a  plan  for  a  peace  conference,  with  certain  promi 
nent  Confederates,  Clement  C.  Clay,  among  others,  to  be 
held  in  Canada.  Mr.  Lincoln  felt  sure  that  the  conference 
would  do  no  good,  and  that  the  Confederates  were  fooling 
Mr.  Greeley,  and  that  they  had  no  real  power  to  act. 

This  turned  out  to  be  exactly  the  truth.  I  was  with  the 
President  just  as  he  was  sending  Mr.  Hay  to  Niagara  with 
written  instructions,  which  were  given  to  see  that  nothing 
which  threatened  the  interests  of  the  Government  should  be 
done.  The  President  was  very  much  annoyed,  and  he  re 
marked  to  me:  "While  Mr.  Greeley  means  right,  he  makes 
me  almost  as  much  trouble  as  the  whole  Southern  Confed 
eracy." 

While,  as  I  have  previously  observed,  Greeley  was  in 
tensely  loyal  to  the  country,  yet  he  was  so  nervous  and  un 
stable  in  his  mind  that  he  could  not  resist  the  effort  to  bring 
about  a  condition  of  peace.  I  think  he  would  have  consented 
to  almost  anything  in  order  to  secure  it.  He  was  very 
anxious  for  the  issuance  of  a  proclamation  abolishing 
slavery,  and  on  the  nineteenth  of  August,  1862,  addressed 
a  very  arrogant  open  letter  to  President  Lincoln  on  the 
subject. 

Lincoln's  reply  was  so  good,  so  perfect,  and  so  conclusive 
that  I  give  it,  as  follows: 


102    FIFTY  VEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

'     '•       •  >        $&K  EXECUTIVE   MANSION, 

WASHINGTON,  Friday,  August  22,  1862. 
HON.  HORACE  GREELEY: 

DEAR  SIR:  I  have  just  read  yours  of  the  nineteenth  instant,  ad 
dressed  to  myself  through  The  New  York  Tribune. 

If  there  be  any  statements  or  assumptions  of  facts  which  I  may  know 
to  be  erroneous,  I  do  not  now  and  here  controvert  them. 

If  there  may  be  any  inferences  which  I  may  believe  to  be  falsely 
drawn,  I  do  not  now  and  here  argue  against  them. 

If  there  be  perceptible  in  it  an  impatient  and  dictatorial  tone,  I  waive 
it  in  deference  to  an  old  friend  whose  heart  I  have  always  supposed  to 
be  right. 

As  to  the  policy  "I  seem  to  be  pursuing,"  as  you  say,  I  have  not  meant 
to  leave  any  one  in  doubt.  I  would  save  the  Union.  I  would  save  it 
in  the  shortest  way  under  the  Constitution. 

The  sooner  the  National  authority  can  be  restored,  the  nearer  the 
Union  will  be  —  the  Union  as  it  was. 

If  there  be  those  who  would  not  save  the  Union  unless  they  could 
at  the  same  time  save  slavery,  I  do  not  agree  with  them. 

If  there  be  those  who  would  not  save  the  Union  unless  they  could  at 
the  same  time  destroy  slavery,  I  do  not  agree  with  them. 

My  paramount  object  is  to  save  the  Union,  and  not  either  to  save  or 
destroy  slavery. 

If  I  could  save  the  Union  without  freeing  any  slave,  I  would  do  it; 
and  if  I  could  save  it  by  freeing  all  the  slaves,  I  would  do  it;  and  if  I 
could  save  it  by  freeing  some  and  leaving  others  alone,  I  would  do  that. 

What  I  do  about  slavery  and  the  colored  race,  I  do  because  I  believe 
it  helps  to  save  the  Union,  and  what  I  forbear,  I  forbear  because  I  do 
not  believe  it  would  help  to  save  the  Union. 

I  shall  do  less  whenever  I  shall  believe  what  I  am  doing  hurts  the 
cause,  and  shall  do  more  whenever  I  believe  doing  more  will  help  the 
cause. 

I  shall  try  to  correct  errors  when  shown  to  be  errors,  and  I  shall 
adopt  new  views  so  fast  as  they  will  appear  to  be  true  views. 

I  have  here  stated  my  purpose  according  to  my  view  of  official  duty, 
and  I  intend  no  modifications  of  my  oft-expressed  personal  wish  that  all 
men  everywhere  could  be  free. 

Yours, 

A.  LINCOLN. 


LINCOLN  103 

It  is  said  that  Mr.  Greeley  remarked  after  reading  the 
letter  that  he  had  been  knocked  out  by  one  letter  from  Mr. 
Lincoln,  and  that  he  "would  be  damned  if  he  ever  wrote  him 
another." 

There  was  more  personal  bitterness  evinced  against  Mr. 
Lincoln  in  the  campaign  of  1864  than  ever  before  or  since 
in  a  Presidential  campaign.  He  was  denounced  in  the  most 
intemperate  language  as  a  tyrant,  a  dictator,  whose  admin 
istration  had  proven  a  failure.  A  certain  element  of  so- 
called  "high  class"  New  Englanders,  men  of  the  Wendell 
Phillips  type,  were  particularly  bitter  in  their  denunciation. 
And  I  may  remark  in  passing  that  the  New  England  men  of 
letters  never  did  have  a  proper  appreciation  of  the  worth  of 
Abraham  Lincoln. 

He  was  triumphantly  reelected  amid  the  universal  re 
joicing  of  the  friends  of  liberty  throughout  the  North.  He 
took  the  election  very  quietly.  He  apparently  felt  no  sense 
of  personal  triumph  over  his  opponents  and  those  who  had 
so  bitterly  attacked  him  during  the  campaign.  He  seemed 
only  to  have  a  feeling  of  deep  gratitude  to  his  fellow  citizens 
who  had  testified  their  confidence  in  his  administration.  On 
the  evening  of  election  day,  when  it  became  evident  that  he 
was  reelected  to  the  Presidency,  in  response  to  a  serenade  he 
said: 

"I  am  thankful  to  God  for  this  approval  by  the  people.  While  deeply 
grateful  for  this  mark  of  their  confidence  in  me,  if  I  know  my  heart,  my 
gratitude  is  free  from  any  taint  of  personal  triumph,  but  I  give  thanks 
to  the  Almighty  for  this  evidence  of  the  people's  resolution  to  stand  by 
free  government  and  the  rights  of  humanity." 

And  again  in  that  eloquent,  simple  little  response  which 
he  made  to  the  joint  committee  of  Congress  appointed  to 
wait  upon  him  to  notify  him  of  his  second  election,  after 


104     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  count  of  the  electoral  votes  by  a  joint  session  of  the 
Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  in  Congress,  he  said: 

"With  deep  gratitude  to  my  countrymen  for  this  mark  of  their  con 
fidence;  with  a  distrust  of  my  own  ability  to  perform  the  duty  required, 
under  the  most  favorable  circumstances,  and  now  rendered  doubly  diffi 
cult  by  existing  national  perils ;  yet  with  a  firm  reliance  on  the  strength 
of  our  free  Government,  and  the  eventual  loyalty  of  the  people  to  the 
just  principles  upon  which  it  is  founded,  and,  above  all,  with  an  un 
shaken  faith  in  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  Nations,  I  accept  this  trust.  Be 
pleased  to  signify  this  to  the  respective  Houses  of  Congress." 

These  utterances  show  more  clearly  than  any  one  else  can 
describe  the  state  of  mind  in  which  the  President  received 
his  reelection,  and  in  which  he  was  about  to  enter  his  second 
term  as  President  of  the  Republic.  Without  any  personal 
feeling  of  pride,  he  was  certain  in  his  own  mind  that  his  re 
election  was  necessary  in  order  to  save  the  Union. 

I  attended  the  second  inauguration,  March  4,  1865.  I 
have  a  particularly  vivid  recollection  of  the  scene  which  took 
place  in  the  Senate  chamber  when  Mr.  Johnson  took  the  oath 
as  Vice-President.  The  simple  truth  is,  and  it  was  plain  to 
every  one  present  in  that  chamber,  Mr.  Johnson  was  intoxi 
cated.  Johnson  delivered  a  rambling,  senseless  address.  I 
sat  next  to  Senator  Lane  of  Indiana,  and  I  remarked  that 
somebody  should  stop  him.  Lane  sent  up  a  note  to  the  Sec 
retary  of  the  Senate,  telling  him  to  get  Johnson  to  cease 
speaking  and  take  the  oath.  We  felt  Johnson  was  making 
an  exhibition  of  himself  in  the  presence  of  the  President,  the 
Cabinet,  the  Foreign  Representatives,  the  two  Houses  of 
Congress,  and  a  gathering  of  the  most  distinguished  men  of 
the  Nation.  The  Secretary  wrote  some  lines  and  placed 
them  before  Mr.  Johnson,  who  did  not  appear  to  notice  them. 
Finally  he  was  made  to  understand  that  he  must  take  the 
oath,  as  the  time  had  come  when  the  President,  according  to 


LINCOLN  105 

usual  custom,  would  have  to  go  to  the  east  front  of  the 
Capitol  to  take  the  oath  as  President  of  the  United  States. 
Johnson,  with  a  sort  of  wild  sweep  of  his  arm  said,  "I  will 
take  the  oath,  but  I  regard  my  devotion  to  the  Union  as 
greater  evidence  of  my  loyalty  than  any  oath  I  could  take." 

I  was  close  to  Mr.  Lincoln  at  the  solemn  moment  when 
Chief  Justice  Chase  administered  to  him  the  oath  of  office. 
There  was  a  vast  crowd  of  people,  great  enthusiasm  and  re 
joicing,  and  the  war  was  practically  over, —  a  far  different 
scene  from  the  one  which  took  place  just  four  years  before, 
when  Chief  Justice  Taney  in  the  same  place  administered 
the  same  oath.  At  that  time  there  was  no  noisy  demonstra 
tion.  There  was  a  solemn  hush,  as  every  one  realized  that 
the  country  was  about  to  be  plunged  into  one  of  the  mightiest 
civil  wars  of  all  history.  Indeed  many  men  believed  that 
there  was  a  concerted  plot  to  assassinate  Mr.  Lincoln  at  that 
time,  and  that  he  would  never  be  permitted  to  enter  upon  the 
duties  of  his  office. 

I  heard  him  deliver  his  second  inaugural  address, —  one  of 
his  two  greatest  speeches. 

The  last  time  I  saw  Abraham  Lincoln  alive  was  about 
three  weeks  before  his  assassination,  as  I  now  recollect.  He 
was  at  the  White  House.  There  had  been  constant  rumors 
throughout  his  first  term  that  he  was  in  danger  of  some  such 
outrage,  but  as  the  war  drew  to  a  close,  with  the  natural 
bitter  and  resentful  feeling  in  the  South,  these  rumors  seemed 
to  increase.  I  told  him  what  I  had  heard,  and  urged  him  to 
be  careful.  It  did  not  seem  to  concern  him  much,  and  the 
substance  of  his  reply  was  that  he  must  take  his  chances; 
that  he  could  not  live  in  an  iron  box,  as  he  expressed  it, 
and  do  his  duty  as  President  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  difficult  for  one  who  did  not  live  in  those  terrible 
days  from  1861  to  1865  to  realize  the  awful  shock  of  horror 


106     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

that  went  through  the  whole  Nation  on  the  morning  of  April 
15,  1865,  when  the  message  came,  "Abraham  Lincoln  is 
dead."  In  his  old  home  in  Springfield,  it  seemed  that  the 
whole  population  assembled  in  the  public  square,  and  the 
duty  devolved  on  me  to  announce  to  the  assembled  people 
that  the  great  President  had  passed  away.  There  was  in 
tense  suppressed  excitement.  No  one  dared  utter  a  word 
in  disparagement  of  Abraham  Lincoln.  The  crowd  was  in 
the  humor  for  hanging  to  the  limb  of  the  first  convenient 
tree  any  one  who  dared  to  make  a  slighting  suggestion.  It 
was  not  alone  in  Springfield,  but  it  was  throughout  the  en 
tire  North  that  this  feeling  prevailed.  There  was  fear  that 
the  Government  would  go  to  pieces,  almost  that  the  end  of 
the  world  was  at  hand. 

Soon  the  news  came  from  different  sources  that  he  was 
to  be  buried  in  Washington,  or  somewhere  in  the  East.  The 
people  of  Springfield  became  very  much  worked  up.  A 
committee  was  appointed  to  go  to  Washington  to  insist  that 
the  remains  should  be  taken  to  Springfield.  I  was  a  member 
of  this  committee.  We  left  inmmediately,  but  before  we 
arrived  at  Harrisburg  it  had  been  determined  that  the  only 
fitting  final  resting  place  of  all  that  remained  of  the  immortal 
Lincoln  was  at  his  old  home  in  Springfield ;  and  the  funeral 
train  had  already  left  Washington.  The  committee  waited 
at  Harrisburg  for  its  arrival.  Through  the  courtesy  of 
Governor  Curtin,  of  Pennsylvania,  we  were  permitted  to 
board  the  train,  and  we  accompanied  the  remains  from  there 
to  Philadelphia,  New  York,  Albany,  Buffalo,  Cleveland, 
Indianapolis,  Chicago,  and  finally  to  Springfield.  At  each 
place  the  remains  lay  in  state  and  were  viewed  by  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  people. 

In  all,  the  entire  journey  consumed  some  twelve  days 
from  the  time  the  party  left  Washington  until  it  arrived 


ABRAHAM    LINCOLN 


LINCOLN  107 

in  Springfield.  It  was  determined  that  the  funeral  train 
should  follow  the  same  route  and  stop  at  practically  the  same 
places  that  Lincoln  visited  on  his  way  to  Washington  to  be 
inaugurated  as  the  first  Republican  President  of  the  United 
States.  The  country  was  so  wrought  up  no  one  seemed 
certain  what  was  to  happen;  no  one  knew  but  that  there 
would  be  a  second  and  bloodier  revolution,  in  which  the 
Government  might  fall  into  the  hands  of  a  dictator;  and  it 
was  thought  the  funeral  trip  would  serve  to  arouse  the  pa 
triotism  of  the  people,  which  it  did. 

I  never  witnessed  anything  like  the  universal  demonstra 
tion  of  sorrow,  not  only  at  every  city  where  the  remains  lay 
in  state  but  all  during  the  entire  route,  at  every  little  village 
and  hamlet;  even  at  cross-roads  thousands  of  people  would 
be  gathered  to  catch  a  glimpse  of  the  funeral  train  as  it 
passed  by.  In  Philadelphia  the  casket  rested  in  Independ 
ence  Hall.  In  New  York  I  suppose  not  less  than  half  a 
million  people  passed  by  to  view  the  body.  General  Scott 
came  down  with  the  procession  to  the  station,  and  to  him  I 
introduced  our  Illinois  friends.  His  response  was  given  in 
a  most  dignified  and  ponderous  style:  "Gentlemen,  you  do 
me  great  honor." 

The  farther  west  we  proceeded,  drawing  constantly 
nearer  to  the  home  of  Lincoln,  the  more  wrought  up  the 
people  seemed  to  be.  In  the  West  there  were  not  only  ex 
pressions  of  deep  sorrow,  but  of  vengeance  as  well,  espe 
cially  toward  the  South.  Before  the  facts  became  fully 
known,  it  was  thought  that  the  assassination  was  the  result 
of  a  Southern  conspiracy,  and  there  was  a  feeling  that  the 
whole  South  should  be  punished  for  the  act  of  one  of  her 
misguided  sons.  The  body  lay  in  state  for  two  days  in  Chi 
cago,  and  then  came  the  last  stage  of  the  journey  to  Spring- 
ndcl.  It  first  was  taken  to  the  State  House,  and  was  after- 


108     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

wards  placed  in  the  old  vault  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  in  Oak 
Ridge  Cemetery,  where  it  remained  until  the  monument  was 
completed.  Bishop  Simpson,  one  of  the  most  eloquent  men 
in  the  Methodist  Church,  and  a  devoted  friend  of  Mr.  Lin 
coln  during  his  life,  preached  the  funeral  sermon.  The  ser 
vices  at  Springfield  were  simple  in  the  extreme,  just  as 
Mr.  Lincoln  would  have  wished.  Steps  were  at  once  taken 
for  the  erection  of  the  monument,  which  stands  in  Oak  Ridge 
Cemetery  to-day. 

So  far  as  I  can  learn,  every  member  of  the  funeral  party 
that  accompanied  the  remains  of  Abraham  Lincoln  from 
Washington  to  Springfield,  with  the  exception  of  Mr.  E.  F. 
Leonard  and  myself,  has  passed  away. 

It  was  my  good  fortune  to  know  Abraham  Lincoln  in  all 
the  walks  of  life.  I  knew  him  as  President,  and  I  was  per 
mitted  to  know  him  in  the  sacred  precincts  of  his  family  at 
home.  I  have  studied  the  lives  of  the  great  men  of  the  world, 
and  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  now,  after  nearly  fifty  years  have 
passed  away  since  his  death,  that  Abraham  Lincoln  was  the 
peer  in  all  that  makes  a  man  great,  useful,  and  noble,  of  any 
man  in  all  the  world's  history. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

NOTABLES   IN   THE   THIRTY-NINTH    CONGRESS 
1864   TO    1870 

1HAD  a  very  active  campaign  for  election  to  Congress 
in  1864.  As  I  have  stated  elsewhere,  I  had,  while 
Speaker,  so  framed  the  district  that  I  thought  it  would  surely 
be  a  Republican  one;  but  very  much  to  my  surprise,  it  went 
Democratic  when  Mr.  Swett  was  a  candidate.  For  a  number 
of  reasons  I  was  more  than  anxious  to  carry  the  district. 
First,  naturally  I  did  not  want  to  be  defeated;  second,  I 
wanted  to  show  that  it  was  really  a  Republican  district,  and 
more  especially  still  on  President  Lincoln's  account,  I  was 
solicitous  that  a  Republican  should  be  elected  from  the  Presi 
dent's  own  district,  as  was  President  Lincoln  also.  The 
National  Committee  assisted  a  good  deal,  and  the  President 
himself  helped  whenever  there  was  an  opportunity.  I  was 
elected  by  a  good,  safe  majority,  and  entered  the  Thirty- 
ninth  Congress  in  December,  1865. 

The  Illinois  delegation  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress,  when 
I  entered  the  House,  while  containing  few  members,  still 
compared  favorably  with  other  delegations,  and  consisted  of 
very  good  men  who  reflected  credit  on  the  State,  and  some 
of  whom  had  far  more  than  ordinary  ability.  General  John 
A.  Logan,  of  whom  I  have  written  in  another  part  of  these 
memoirs,  was  a  very  prominent  member  of  the  delegation  and 
of  the  House.  E.  B.  Washburne  was  also  a  leading  member. 
He  was  very  influential,  and  at  one  time  was  in  a  sense 

109 


110     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  leader  of  the  House.  He  early  became  prominent  as  one 
of  the  intimate  friends  and  supporters  of  General  Grant, 
who,  every  one  supposed,  would  be  the  nominee  of  the  Re 
publican  party  to  succeed  President  Johnson.  Thaddeus 
Stevens  was  the  real  leader  on  every  occasion  when  he  chose 
to  assume  that  position.  His  whole  interest,  however,  seemed 
to  be  concentrated  on  reconstruction,  one  of  the  greatest 
problems  that  has  ever  confronted  this  country,  and  conse 
quently  he  gave  little  attention  to  general  legislation.  This 
gave  Washburne  quite  a  commanding  voice  in  shaping  the 
general  legislation  of  the  House. 

John  Wentworth  was  one  of  the  best  known  citizens 
of  Chicago  of  his  day,  and  was  closely  identified  with  the 
early  history  of  the  city.  He  was  several  times  a  member  of 
the  House.  I  found  him  to  be  a  capable  member  of  the 
Thirty-ninth  Congress,  a  man  of  influence,  and  I  liked  him 
very  much.  He  was  Mayor  of  Chicago  when  President 
Lincoln  was  assassinated,  and  I  recall  that  he  was  at  the  sta 
tion  at  the  head  of  the  committee  when  the  funeral  train  ar 
rived  in  Chicago.  John  Wentworth  was  quite  a  character  in 
our  State  politics,  but  he  was  particularly  noted  as  being  one 
of  the  foremost  citizens  of  his  home  city. 

Burton  C.  Cook,  of  Ottawa,  was  one  of  the  ablest  men  in 
the  Illinois  delegation.  He  was  a  splendid  man,  a  man  of 
high  character,  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  bar  of  the  State  of 
Illinois,  and  retired  from  Congress  to  become  general  counsel 
of  the  Northwestern  Railroad.  He  occupied  a  very  im 
portant  place  in  the  House,  and  was  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  the  District  of  Columbia.  He  could  not  endure 
ridicule,  and  he  was  not  particularly  quick  in  argument, 
although  a  very  good  debater. 

A  rather  humorous  incident  occurred  on  one  occasion  when 
he  was  pushing  a  bill  to  have  Pennsylvania  Avenue  paved. 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  111 

Proctor  Knott,  from  Kentucky,  was  then  a  member  of  the 
House,  and  one  of  its  cleverest  and  wittiest  speakers.  I 
was  called  to  the  chair  because  Cook  knew  that  I  would  take 
care  of  him  the  best  I  could  in  the  conduct  of  the  bill  through 
the  committee  of  the  whole.  We  got  along  with  the  bill 
very  well  for  a  good  part  of  the  day,  until  Knott  took  the 
floor  and  made  one  of  his  incomparably  funny  speeches,  de 
picting  the  situation  on  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  with  its  fine 
carriages  and  outfits,  with  buckles  on  the  coachmen's  hats  as 
big  as  garden  gates.  He  made  so  much  fun  of  the  bill  that 
Cook,  being  unable  to  stand  it,  moved  that  the  committee 
rise.  We  never  heard  of  the  bill  afterwards. 

S.  S.  Marshall,  a  Democrat  from  Southern  Illinois,  and 
prominent  as  such,  was  a  member  of  Congress  for  many 
terms,  and  at  one  time  was  the  leader  of  the  minority  in  the 
House.  At  that  time  the  Democrats  in  the  House  were  so 
few  in  number  that  occasionally  they  were  unable  to  secure 
the  ayes  and  noes.  They  exercised  very  little  influence  on 
legislation,  and  were  not  much  in  evidence  in  debate,  the  main 
contest  then  being  between  the  radical  and  conservative  ele 
ments  of  the  Republican  party  over  Reconstruction. 

General  John  F.  Farnsworth  of  St.  Charles  was  quite  in 
fluential  as  a  member,  and  a  very  strong  man,  but  was 
particularly  noted  for  his  dauntless  courage.  On  one  oc 
casion  I  saw  him  shake  his  fist  in  General  Benjamin  F.  But 
ler's  face,  daring  him  to  resent  it.  Butler  did  not  resent  it, 
as  the  House  was  in  session;  and,  any  way,  excepting  with 
his  tongue,  Butler  was  not  a  fighting  man. 

Eben  C.  Ingersoll,  who  was  familiarly  called  by  his  friends 
Clark  Ingersoll,  served  in  that  Congress.  He  was  a  very 
clever  man,  possessed  of  considerable  talent,  and  could  on 
occasions  deliver  a  capitally  witty  speech.  I  remember  a 
rather  ingenious  passage  from  one  of  his  speeches  delivered 


112     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

when  the  controversy  between  the  President  and  Congress 
was  at  its  height.  He  asserted  that  the  country  was  sorely 
afflicted;  that  it  suffered  all  sorts  of  troubles,  trials,  em 
barrassments  and  difficulties.  First,  he  said,  it  was  afflicted 
with  cholera,  next  with  trichinae,  and  then  with  Andy  John 
son,  all  in  the  same  year,  and  that  was  more  than  any 
country  could  stand.  Eben  C.  Ingersoll  was  a  brother  of 
the  famous  Robert  G.  Ingersoll,  the  world's  greatest  ag 
nostic. 

Robert  G.  Ingersoll  was  one  of  the  most  eloquent  men 
whom  I  have  ever  heard.  He  could  utter  the  most  beautiful 
sentiments  clothed  in  language  equally  beautiful.  Speaking 
of  death  and  the  hereafter  one  day,  I  heard  him  express  him 
self  in  about  the  same  language  he  afterward  used  on  the 
lecture  platform.  It  made  a  wonderful  impression  on  me. 
He  said: 

"And  suppose  after  all  that  death  does  end  all?  Next  to  eternal 
joy,  next  to  being  forever  with  those  we  love  and  those  who  have  loved 
us,  next  to  that,  is  to  be  wrapt  in  the  dreamless  drapery  of  eternal  peace. 
Next  to  eternal  life  is  eternal  sleep.  Upon  the  shadowy  shore  of  death 
the  sea  of  trouble  casts  no  wave.  Eyes  that  have  been  curtained  by 
the  everlasting  dark,  will  never  know  again  the  burning  touch  of  tears. 
Lips  touched  by  eternal  silence  will  never  speak  again  the  broken  words 
of  grief.  Hearts  of  dust  do  not  break.  The  dead  do  not  weep. 
Within  the  tomb  no  veiled  and  weeping  sorrow  sits,  and  in  the  rayless 
gloom  is  crouched  no  shuddering  fear. 

"I  had  rather  think  of  those  I  have  loved,  and  lost,  as  having  re 
turned  to  earth,  as  having  become  a  part  of  the  elemental  wealth  of  the 
world  —  I  would  rather  think  of  them  as  unconscious  dust,  I  would 
rather  dream  of  them  as  gurgling  in  the  streams,  floating  in  the  clouds, 
bursting  in  the  foam  of  light  upon  the  shores  of  worlds,  I  would  rather 
think  of  them  as  the  lost  visions  of  a  forgotten  night,  than  to  have  even 
the  faintest  fear  that  their  naked  souls  have  been  clutched  by  an  ortho 
dox  God.  I  will  leave  my  dear  where  Nature  leaves  them.  Whatever 
flower  of  hope  springs  up  in  my  heart,  I  will  cherish,  I  will  give  it 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  113 

breath  of  sighs  and  rain  of  tears.     But  I  cannot  believe  that  there  is 
any  being  in  this  universe  who  has  been  created  for  eternal  pain." 

Had  it  not  been  for  the  manner  in  which  Robert  Ingersoll 
outraged  the  members  of  every  Christian  denomination  by 
attacking  and  ridiculing  their  beliefs,  he  would  certainly  have 
been  called  to  high  office  in  the  Nation.  He  did  not  spare 
any  denomination.  Beginning  with  the  Catholics  and  end 
ing  with  the  Baptists,  he  abused  them  all,  made  fun  of  them, 
and  mercilessly  pointed  out  their  weak  points.  He  was 
always  particularly  bitter  against  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
because,  he  declared,  he  was  raised  a  Presbyterian,  and  knew 
more  about  that  church  than  any  other.  The  two  brothers 
w^ere  very  fond  of  each  other,  and  Eben  C.  never  seemed  to 
tire  of  talking  about  his  brother's  great  talent.  Robert  G. 
was  nearly  broken-hearted  when  his  brother  died.  One  of  the 
most  touching  and  eloquent  addresses  which  I  have  ever  heard 
was  the  address  he  delivered  on  the  occasion  of  Eben's  fun 
eral.  He  stood  at  the  head  of  the  casket  and  once  or  twice 
nearly  broke  down.  It  was  in  that  address,  standing  there 
in  the  presence  of  death,  that  he  expressed  some  doubts 
as  to  the  truth  of  his  own  teachings  and  intimated  the  pos 
sibility  of  the  existence  of  some  life  beyond  the  grave.  This 
was  the  only  public  occasion  of  which  I  have  any  knowledge 
in  which  Robert  G.  Ingersoll  seemed  to  falter  in  his  course. 

We  wTere  very  intimate,  and  it  is  a  real  pleasure  to  me 
to  pay  him  here  a  tribute.  He  was  a  man  of  extraordinary 
talent  and  ability,  one  of  the  most  lovable  natures,  and  a  man 
of  the  cleanest,  most  delightful  home  life.  In  many  respects, 
I  regard  him  as  one  of  the  greatest  men  of  his  day ;  certainly 
he  was  the  greatest  agnostic  of  his  time,  if  not  of  all  time. 
No  one  has  taken  his  place.  The  very  name,  Agnostic,  is 
now  rarely  heard.  And  why?  Because  Robert  G.  Inger- 


114     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

soil  mercilessly  tore  down.  He  did  not  create,  or  build  any 
thing;  he  attempted  to  take  away  the  beliefs  in  all  religion, 
and  he  offered  nothing  in  return.  Hence  it  is  that  his  teach 
ings  have  practically  died  with  him. 

Another  member  of  the  Illinois  delegation  in  the  Thirty- 
ninth  Congress,  a  well-known  citizen  of  the  State,  was 
Anthony  Thornton.  He  had  been  a  member  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  State,  was  a  fine  lawyer  of  the  best  type  of 
manhood,  and  he  enjoyed  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the 
members  of  the  House.  He  resided  in  Shelbyville,  but  after 
retiring  from  Congress  he  decided  to  go  to  Decatur,  where 
there  was  more  business  for  a  lawyer,  and  better  opportuni 
ties.  He  did  not  succeed  very  well,  however,  because  it  was 
too  late  in  his  life  to  make  a  change  and  enter  new  fields. 

A  little  incident  connected  with  him  occurred  while  I  was 
Governor  of  the  State.  A  young  boy,  whose  parents  the 
Judge  knew,  committed  a  burglary  and  was  sent  to  the 
penitentiary.  The  parents  of  the  boy  were  naturally  anx 
ious  to  get  him  out,  and  appealed  to  Judge  Thornton  to  as 
sist  in  securing  his  pardon.  The  Judge  and  I  had  served  in 
Congress  together,  and,  naturally,  any  plea  bearing  his  en 
dorsement  would  have  great  weight  with  me.  Believing  that 
the  boy  had  been  influenced  by  bad  companions,  he  yielded 
and  came  to  Springfield  to  see  me.  I  looked  the  case  over 
and  finally  said: 

"Judge  Thornton,  you  are  an  older  man  than  I  am ;  you 
were  in  Congress  with  me;  you  have  been  a  Judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  State ;  if  you  will  say  that  you  would 
issue  this  pardon  if  you  occupied  the  chair  I  now  occupy  as 
Governor  of  this  State,  I  will  pardon  him." 

He  replied:  "Governor,  I  would  not  ask  you  to  do  a  thing 
I  would  not  do  myself,  to  save  my  right  arm." 

Whereupon  I  at  once  issued  the  pardon. 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  115 

"Judge,"  I  told  him,  "the  train  will  leave  in  a  short  time; 
go  to  Joliet  and  take  the  boy  home  with  you." 

He  did  not  do  this;  but  he  thanked  me  very  cordially  and 
said  that  he  would  see  the  boy  as  soon  as  he  got  home.  The 
very  night  that  the  boy  left  the  penitentiary  and  returned 
home,  he  committed  another  burglary  and  was  immediately 
arrested.  I  happened  to  see  an  account  of  the  crime  in  the 
papers  next  morning,  and  I  cut  it  out  and  sent  it  to  Judge 
Thornton,  with  the  inquiry,  "Judge,  what  does  this  mean?  " 
He  at  once  came  to  Springfield,  and  told  me  that  he  had  been 
fooled  in  prevailing  upon  me  to  pardon  the  young  man,  and 
pledged  me  that  he  would  follow  him  to  the  ends  of  the 
earth  if  necessary  in  order  to  punish  him  for  his  crime.  The 
boy  was  sent  back  to  the  penitentiary  and  I  never  heard  of 
him  afterwards. 

Judge  Thornton  was  one  of  the  most  honorable  of  men,  a 
man  of  learning  and  legal  ability  as  well. 

One  day,  before  I  was  elected  to  the  Thirty-ninth  Con 
gress,  President  Lincoln  was  talking  with  me  about  the  dif 
ferent  members  of  that  body.  "There  is  a  young  man  by 
the  name  of  Blaine  now  serving  in  Congress,"  said  he,  "who 
seems  to  be  one  of  the  brightest  men  in  the  House.  His 
speeches  are  always  short,  always  full  of  facts,  and  always 
forcible.  I  am  very  fond  of  him.  He  is  one  of  the  coming 
men  of  the  country." 

This  was  one  of  the  reasons  why  I  was  early  attracted  to 
Mr.  Blaine. 

He  was  candidate  for  Speaker  in  the  Forty-first  Congress. 
I  was  rather  zealous  in  his  behalf,  and  had  more  or  less  of 
a  prominent  part  in  his  selection.  When  Mr.  Blaine  con 
cluded  that  he  would  be  a  candidate  for  the  Speakership,  a 
little  dinner  was  given  at  Welkers',  a  rather  famous  restau- 


116    FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

rant  in  Washington,  at  which  Judge  Kelley,  Judge  Orth,  the 
late  Senator  Allison,  who  then  was  a  member  of  the  House 
from  the  State  of  Iowa;  Mr.  Mercur  of  Pennsylvania,  the 
gentleman  at  the  head  of  the  Associated  Press  in  Washing 
ton,  and  myself  were  present.  After  the  dinner  it  was  given 
out  to  the  press  that  Mr.  Elaine  was  a  candidate  for  Speaker. 
As  the  campaign  progressed  it  seemed  to  depend  on  Mr. 
Allison  and  me  more  largely  than  on  any  other  members  to 
take  care  of  his  interests.  He  was  elected  Speaker,  and  I  had 
been  given  to  understand  by  him,  and  had  so  communicated  to 
friends  in  Congress  whom  I  had  induced  to  support  Mr. 
Elaine,  that  I  should  be  consulted  in  the  make-up  of  the 
committees.  Mr.  Elaine  never  said  a  word  to  me  on  the 
subject,  but  almost  at  the  last  moment  wrote  me  this  note: 

"DEAR  CULLOM: 

"Which  committee  would  you  prefer,  Territories  or  Claims? 

"JAMES  G.  ELAINE." 

I  selected  Territories  and  became  chairman  of  that  com 
mittee.  Allison  told  me  he  never  spoke  to  him  in  reference 
to  committees,  although  he  gave  him  important  assignments. 

Probably  the  most  bitter  enemy  Mr.  Elaine  ever  had  in 
public  life  was  Roscoe  Conkling,  a  Senator  from  New  York. 
The  quarrel  between  Elaine  and  Conkling  commenced  in  the 
Thirty-ninth  Congress,  over  some  very  trivial  matter,  and 
continued  from  that  time  on  until  Elaine  was  nominated  as 
the  candidate  of  the  Republican  party  for  the  Presidency,  in 
1884,  in  which  contest  he  was  defeated  by  Grover  Cleveland. 

I  occupied  a  seat  next  to  Mr.  Conkling  during  the  early 
years  of  my  service  in  Congress.  He  was  a  very  friendly, 
companionable  man,  especially  to  any  one  whom  he  did  not 
consider  a  rival,  and,  as  I  was  a  young  man  just  entering 
Congress  and  politics,  he  gave  me  his  friendship.  I  was 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  117 

present,  sitting  next  to  Conkling,  when  the  famous  contro 
versy  in  the  House  took  place  between  Elaine  and  Conkling. 
During  the  session,  from  time  to  time,  they  had  been  quar 
relling.  Conkling  had  seemed  to  have  a  little  the  best  of  the 
argument.  Elaine  became  exasperated  one  day,  and  in  the 
course  of  the  debate  gave  Conkling  the  worst  "tongue  lash 
ing"  probably  ever  given  by  one  man  to  another  on  the  floor 
of  the  House.  Conkling,  although  unable  to  reply  effec 
tively,  demeaned  himself  with  great  dignity.  His  manners 
were  placid  and  his  reply  was  in  measured  terms.  It  was  in 
striking  contrast  to  what  Mr.  Elaine  said.  To  use  a  phrase 
graphic  if  inelegant,  he  jumped  on  Conkling  with  both  feet 
and  literally  tore  him  to  pieces  without  any  attempt  at  dig 
nity.  This  controversy  with  Conkling  probably  caused  the 
defeat  of  Mr.  Elaine  for  the  nomination  —  first,  in  conven 
tions  prior  to  1884,  and  finally  after  he  became  the  nominee 
of  that  year. 

Elaine  was  a  candidate  for  President  for  many  years.  It 
seemed  to  be  his  destiny,  as  it  was  that  of  Henry  Clay,  to  be 
able  to  secure  the  nomination  only  when  the  Republican  party 
went  down  in  defeat,  as  it  did  for  the  first  time  since  the  elec 
tion  of  Lincoln.  He  was  beaten  in  the  Republican  National 
Conventions  by  men  of  mediocre  ability  when  the  party  was 
victorious. 

He  was  a  leading  candidate  at  the  Cincinnati  Convention, 
when  Hayes  was  nominated.  I  was  there  and  heard  Inger- 
soll's  great  speech  placing  him  in  nomination.  I  have  al 
ways  felt  that  Elaine  would  have  been  nominated  by  that 
convention  if  a  strong,  courageous  presiding  officer  had  been 
in  the  chair.  As  I  sat  behind  Mr.  McPherson,  the  presid 
ing  officer,  and  watched  the  proceedings,  I  thought  that  if 
I  had  had  that  gavel  in  my  hands  there  would  have  been  no 
adjournment  and  James  G.  Elaine  would  have  been  nom- 


118     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

inated.  An  adjournment  was  secured,  however;  the  lights 
were  extinguished,  and  the  enemies  of  Elaine  united,  and 
Hayes  became  the  nominee. 

But  at  the  convention  held  in  Chicago,  in  1884,  no  other 
candidate  was  seriously  considered,  and  Blaine  was  nomi 
nated  for  President  and  Logan  for  Vice-President. 

I  had  to  do  much  in  connection  with  Blaine  in  the  cam 
paign  of  1884.  He  was  a  very  agreeable  man  so  long  as 
things  went  to  suit  him;  but  he  did  not  attempt  to  control 
himself  when  things  went  at  all  against  him.  He  was  cam 
paigning  through  Indiana,  Ohio,  and  Illinois,  in  1884;  I  had 
been  on  the  platform  with  him  at  Massillon,  Ohio,  when  the 
people  would  scarcely  listen  to  any  one  except  Mr.  McKinley. 
It  was  arranged  that  Blaine  should  come  from  La  Fay- 
ette,  Indiana,  to  Springfield,  Illinois.  I  was  chairman  of 
the  delegation  consisting  of  one  hundred  of  the  most  promi 
nent  men  of  the  State,  selected  to  accompany  him  to  Spring 
field.  The  delegation  went  to  La  Fayette,  and  the  Adju 
tant-General  of  the  State  and  I  waited  on  Mr.  Blaine  at 
the  residence  of  Mr.  George  Williams,  who  is  still  living, 
and  whom  I  have  always  known  intimately.  Mr.  Elaine's 
son  came  down  in  response  to  our  call,  announcing  that  his 
father  had  retired,  ill,  and  would  not  be  disturbed  until 
eight  o'clock  in  the  morning.  At  the  hour  appointed  we 
still  had  difficulty  in  seeing  him,  and  finally  I  enlisted  the 
assistance  of  Mr.  McKinley,  who  was  there,  and  the  Hon. 
Joseph  Medill  of  The  Chicago  Tribune,  to  help  me  to  pre 
vail  upon  Blaine  to  keep  his  engagement.  He  had  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  he  ought  to  go  back  East ;  that  he  was 
needed  there  more  than  he  was  in  the  West.  The  truth 
was  that  he  was  trying  to  evade  the  Springfield  eng?  Ce 
ment.  I  told  him  that  there  would  be  no  less  than  a  ] 
dred  thousand  people  from  all  parts  of  the  State  gathr  JL 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  119 

at  Springfield  to  see  him,  and  it  would  not  do  to  disappoint 
so  vast  a  crowd.  He  finally  consented  to  go,  but  was  very 
ungracious  about  it;  telling  us  not  to  disturb  him  during  the 
trip  from  La  Fayette  to  Springfield,  and  at  once  retired 
to  his  drawing-room. 

We  soon  came  to  a  city  in  Indiana  where  there  was  a 
large  crowd  to  greet  him,  and  following  his  orders,  the 
train  did  not  stop.  He  emerged  from  his  drawing-room 
very  angry  because  the  train  had  not  been  stopped  when  a 
crowd  was  waiting  to  hear  him.  Afterwards  we  halted  at 
almost  every  station  on  the  line  to  Springfield,  where  we 
did  not  arrive  until  almost  dusk.  Probably  a  hundred 
thousand  people  had  been  gathered  there  during  the  day, 
and  at  least  fifty  thousand  waited  until  we  arrived;  but  it 
was  so  dark  that  the  audience  could  scarcely  see  the  speaker. 
He  left  for  Chicago  that  night,  hurrying  through  that  city ; 
thence  to  Wisconsin,  I  believe,  making  enemies  rather  than 
friends.  He  had  gained  the  election  by  his  Western  tour, 
but  lost  it  during  his  stay  in  New  York  City.  "Rum,  Ro 
manism,  and  Rebellion,"  the  Delmonico  dinner,  the  old  row 
with  Conkling  beginning  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress, 
caused  his  defeat.  I  told  him  afterwards  that  if  he  had 
broken  his  leg  in  Springfield  and  been  compelled  to  remain 
as  my  guest  there,  he  would  have  been  elected.  He  agreed 
with  me  that  he  would. 

Notwithstanding  his  defeat,  however,  he  continued  as 
one  of  the  foremost  leaders  of  the  Republican  party  up  to 
the  time  of  his  death.  He  might  have  been  nominated 
at  the  Chicago  Convention,  when  Mr.  Harrison  received 
the  nomination  the  first  time  had  he  not  retired  to  Eu 
ro*" ;  apparently  so  disgusted  at  his  own  defeat  four 
T'S  before  that  he  had  not  the  heart  to  make  the  race 
a/  n. 


120     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

I  do  not  think  Harrison  ever  did  like  Blaine,  but  he  in 
vited  him  to  become  the  Premier  of  his  cabinet,  a  position 
which  Mr.  Blaine  had  held  for  a  few  months  under  General 
Garfield.  Harrison  and  Blaine  never  got  along.  As  I 
say  elsewhere  in  these  recollections,  Harrison  seemed  jealous 
of  Blaine,  and  Blaine  was  not  true  to  his  chief.  Mr.  Blaine 
sent  for  me  one  evening,  and  I  called  at  his  house.  He  re 
lated  to  me  with  considerable  feeling  how  the  President  had 
treated  both  his  family  and  himself.  He  urged  me  to  be 
come  a  candidate  for  President,  but  I  told  him  that  I  would 
not  think  of  doing  so.  I  afterwards  supported  Mr.  Har 
rison  for  reasons  personal  to  myself,  and  not  because  I  was 
particularly  fond  of  Mr.  Harrison. 

James  G.  Blaine  retired  to  private  life  and  died  soon 
afterwards,  a  broken,  disappointed  man.  He  was  one  of 
the  greatest  men  of  his  day,  and  was  the  most  brilliant  and 
probably  the  most  popular  man  with  the  masses  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  Republican  party. 

Rutherford  B.  Hayes  was  the  nineteenth  President  of 
the  United  States,  and  preceded  General  Garfield  in  that 
office.  He  was  neither  as  great  a  man  nor  as  great  an 
orator  as  General  Garfield,  although  he  was  a  much  better 
executive  officer,  and  in  my  opinion  gave  a  better  admin 
istration  than  General  Garfield  would  have  given  had  he 
served  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected.  Rutherford  B. 
Hayes  was  an  inconspicuous  member  of  the  House,  as  I 
recollect  him  now.  He  was  what  I  would  term  a  very  good, 
conscientious  man,  who  never  made  any  enemies;  but  I  do 
not  think  that  any  one  would  say  that  he  was  a  great  man. 
He  did  not  talk  very  much  in  the  House,  nor  accomplish 
very  much.  I  became  quite  friendly  with  him  there.  Sub 
sequently  he  was  nominated  for  Governor  of  Ohio,  and  he 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  121 

invited  me  to  come  to  the  State  and  campaign  for  him, 
which  I  did. 

Thurman  was  his  opponent,  a  very  strong  and  able  man, 
who  subsequently  became  a  Senator  from  Ohio,  and  was  a 
nominee  of  the  Democratic  party  for  Vice-President.  But 
Hayes  defeated  him  for  the  Governorship,  and  was  once 
reflected.  He  was  nominated  for  President  at  the  Cin 
cinnati  Convention  of  1876,  when  Blaine  really  should  have 
been  the  nominee,  and  would  have  been  had  the  permanent 
chairman  of  the  convention,  Edward  McPherson,  grasped 
the  situation  and  held  it  with  a  firm  hand. 

McPherson,  while  a  man  of  good  intentions,  earnest  and 
sincere,  was  clerk  of  the  house  for  many  years  and  had  oc 
cupied  what  might  be  termed  a  subordinate  position.  The 
fact  of  the  matter  is  that  he  permitted  the  convention  to 
get  away  from  him;  an  adjournment  was  secured,  and  the 
same  night  it  was  framed  up  to  beat  Blaine  by  nominating 
Hayes. 

Hayes  was  just  the  kind  of  man  for  a  compromise  candi 
date.  He  was  seriously  handicapped  all  through  his  ad 
ministration  owing  to  the  manner  in  which  he  secured  the 
office.  The  Electoral  Commission,  an  unheard-of  thing, 
created  by  act  of  Congress,  by  eight  to  seven  declared  that 
Hayes  was  elected  over  Tilden.  Very  many  people  were  of 
the  opinion  that  Tilden  was  entitled  to  the  office.  The 
Electoral  Commission  never  would  have  been  agreed  to  by 
the  Democrats  had  they  known  that  Justice  David  Davis, 
of  our  own  State,  would  retire  from  the  Bench  to  take  a 
place  in  the  Senate;  and  it  is  almost  as  certain  that  had 
Judge  Davis  remained  on  the  bench  he  would  have  been  a 
member  of  the  Electoral  Commission,  and  would  have 
surely  voted  in  favor  of  Tilden,  which  would  have  made  him 
President. 


122     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

While  Hayes  was  President  the  "green-back  craze" 
seemed  to  almost  take  possession  of  the  country.  I  delivered 
an  address  at  Rockford,  Illinois,  before  an  agricultural 
society,  taking  issue  to  some  extent  with  the  public  senti 
ment  of  the  country,  and  favoring  sound  money.  The 
President  was  going  through  the  country  at  that  time 
on  a  speaking  tour,  and  in  the  course  of  some  of  his  ad 
dresses  he  commended  what  I  had  said.  He,  accompanied 
by  General  Sherman,  visited  Springfield,  and  I  entertained 
them  at  the  Executive  Mansion. 

President  Hayes,  himself  realizing  the  embarrassment 
under  which  he  entered  the  office  of  President,  was  not  a 
candidate  for  renomination,  and  very  wisely  so.  But  as 
I  have  said,  President  Hayes  was  a  good  man;  he  made 
a  very  commendable  record  as  President  of  the  United 
States,  and  he  was  specially  fortunate  in  the  selection  of 
his  cabinet,  showing  rare  discrimination  in  selecting  some 
of  the  ablest  men  in  the  country  as  his  advisers.  Evarts 
was  his  Secretary  of  State,  and  John  Sherman  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury. 

It  is  a  rather  peculiar  coincidence  that  both  James  R. 
Garfield  and  R.  B.  Hayes  were  members  of  the  Ohio  dele 
gation  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress,  and  both  afterwards 
arrived  at  the  Presidency. 

James  R.  Garfield  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  ability. 
I  was  very  intimate  with  him  during  our  service  in  the 
House.  He  was  an  extremely  likable  man;  I  became  very 
fond  of  him,  and  I  believe  the  feeling  was  reciprocated. 
Also  he  was  distinguished  for  his  eloquence,  and  I  have 
heard  him  make  some  of  the  most  wonderfully  stirring 
and  impressive  speeches  in  the  House.  He  was  probably 
not  the  orator  that  Robert  G.  Ingersoll  was,  but  I  should 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  123 

say  that  he  was  one  of  the  most  effective  public  speakers  of 
his  period;  his  speeches  were  deeper  and  more  serious,  ut 
tered  in  a  graver  style  than  the  beautiful  poetic  imagery  of 
the  great  agnostic.  President  Lincoln  liked  Garfield,  and 
he  was  one  of  the  younger  men  in  the  House  who  always 
supported  the  President,  and  on  whom  the  President  relied. 
He  entered  the  Thirty-eighth  Congress  and  served  many 
terms.  He  enjoyed  the  peculiar  distinction  of  being  a  mem 
ber  of  Congress  from  Ohio,  Senator-elect  from  Ohio,  and 
President-elect  of  the  United  States,  all  at  the  same  time. 

I  attended  the  National  Republican  Convention  of  1880, 
in  which  Grant  and  Elaine  were  the  leading  candidates.  I 
was  at  the  time  Governor  of  Illinois  and  a  candidate  for  re 
election  myself;  consequently  I  could  not  take  any  active 
part  in  the  contest  between  Elaine  and  Grant,  but  of  course, 
naturally,  my  sympathies  were  with  General  Grant. 

I  was  not  a  delegate  to  the  National  Convention,  but  I 
attended  it,  and  it  so  happened  that  I  occupied  a  room  di 
rectly  opposite  that  occupied  by  General  Garfield. 

One  evening,  leaving  my  room,  I  met  General  Garfield 
just  as  he  was  leaving  his,  and  we  dropped  into  general  con 
versation  and  walked  along  together. 

I  have  always  been  considered  a  pretty  fair  judge  of  a 
political  situation  in  State  and  National  conventions,  and  it 
struck  me  as  soon  as  Garfield  had  completed  one  of  the  most 
eloquent  of  all  his  eloquent  addresses,  placing  in  nomina 
tion  Mr.  Sherman,  that  he  was  the  logical  candidate  before 
that  convention. 

To  digress  for  a  moment,  it  is  a  peculiar  coincidence  that 
McKinley  made  his  great  reputation,  in  part,  by  nominating 
Mr.  Sherman  as  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency  in  the 
Minneapolis  convention  of  1892.  Like  General  Garfield  in 
1880,  Mr.  McKinley  was  perfectly  willing  to  receive  the 


124     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

nomination  himself,  although  he  was  then,  as  Garfield  was  in 
1880,  the  leader  of  the  Sherman  forces. 

But  to  return.  General  Garfield  and  I  walked  down 
the  hall  together,  and  being  very  intimate  friends,  I  used 
to  call  him  by  his  first  name,  as  he  did  me.  I  said:  "James, 
if  you  will  keep  a  level  head,  you  will  be  nominated  for  the 
Presidency  by  this  convention  before  it  is  over."  This  was 
a  couple  of  days  before  he  was  actually  nominated. 

He  replied:  "No,  I  think  not." 

But  as  we  walked  along  together  discussing  the  matter, 
I  contended  that  I  was  right. 

At  the  end  of  that  memorable  struggle  between  Grant 
and  Blaine,  in  which  the  great  Republican  party  refused  to 
accept  General  Grant,  the  foremost  Republican  and  soldier 
of  his  time,  Garfield  was  nominated. 

I  remember  vividly  the  form  and  features  of  Garfield  in 
that  convention.  I  see  him  placing  Sherman  in  nomina 
tion,  probably  not  realizing  at  the  time  that  he  was  nomi 
nating  himself.  I  see  him  taking  an  active  part  in  all  the 
debates,  and  as  I  look  back  now  I  do  not  think  I  ever  saw  a 
man  apparently  so  affected  as  General  Garfield  was  when 
it  was  announced  that  he  was  the  nominee  of  the  Republican 
party  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States.  Seemingly 
he  almost  utterly  collapsed.  He  sank  into  his  seat,  over 
come.  He  was  taken  out  of  the  convention  and  to  a  room  in 
the  Grand  Pacific,  where  I  met  him  a  very  few  minutes 
afterwards. 

After  General  Garfield  was  elected  to  the  Presidency, 
but  before  his  inauguration,  I  determined  that  I  would 
urge  upon  him  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Robert  T.  Lincoln 
as  a  member  of  his  cabinet.  I  thought  then  that  his  selection 
would  not  only  be  an  honor  to  the  State,  but  that  the  great 
name  of  Lincoln,  so  fresh  then  in  the  minds  of  the  people, 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  125 

would  materially  strengthen  General  Garfield's  administra 
tion. 

With  this  purpose  in  view,  I  visited  Garfield  at  his  home  in 
Mentor.  The  journey  was  an  extremely  difficult  one,  ow 
ing  to  the  circumstance  that  the  snow  was  yet  deep  on  the 
ground;  so  I  arranged  with  the  conductor  to  stop  at  the 
nearest  point  to  General  Garfield's  house  to  let  me  off, 
which  he  did.  I  walked  from  the  train  through  banks  of 
snow,  and  after  the  hardest  kind  of  a  walk,  finally  reached 
his  house. 

I  at  once  told  him  the  mission  on  which  I  had  come.  We 
had  quite  a  long  talk,  at  the  end  of  which  he  announced 
that  he  would  appoint  Mr.  Lincoln  his  Secretary  of  War. 

In  this  connection  I  desire  to  say  a  few  words  concerning 
Robert  T.  Lincoln.  He  is  still  living.  I  have  known  him 
from  his  boyhood.  He  has  the  integrity  and  the  character 
which  so  distinguished  his  father,  and  was  marked  in  his 
mother's  people  as  well.  It  is  my  firm  conviction  that  long 
ago  Robert  T.  Lincoln  could  have  been  President  of  the 
United  States  had  he  possessed  the  slightest  political  aspi 
ration.  He  has  never  been  ambitious  for  public  office; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  it  has  always  seemed  to  me  that  the 
Presidency  was  especially  repugnant  to  him,  which  would 
be  natural,  considering  the  untimely  death  of  his  father,  if 
for  no  other  reason.  He  was  almost  forced  to  take  an 
active  interest  in  public  affairs,  but  as  soon  as  he  was  per 
mitted  to  do  so  he  retired  to  private  life  to  engage  in  large 
business  undertakings,  and  finally  to  become  the  head  of  the 
Pullman  Company. 

It  seems  strange  to  me  that  he  should  consider  the  pres 
idency  of  a  private  corporation,  no  matter  how  great  the 
emoluments,  above  the  Presidency  of  the  greatest  of  all  Re 
publics.  How  unlike  his  father!  He  was  a  most  excellent 


126     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Secretary  of  War,  and  one  of  General  Garfield's  cabinet 
officers  whom  General  Arthur  invited  to  remain  in  his  cab 
inet,  which  he  did. 

Under  President  Harrison  he  consented  to  become  Min 
ister  to  England.  Neither  my  colleague,  Senator  Farwell, 
nor  I  favored  this  appointment  —  not  because  of  any  an 
tipathy  for  Mr.  Lincoln,  for  whom  I  not  only  have  the 
highest  respect  and  admiration,  but  like  personally  as  well; 
but  Mr.  Blaine,  who  was  Harrison's  Secretary  of  State, 
called  on  me  one  day  and  asked  me  to  recommend  some 
first-class  man  from  Illinois  for  the  post.  After  a  consul 
tation  with  my  colleague,  we  determined  to  recommend  an 
eminent  lawyer  and  cultured  gentleman  of  Chicago,  John 
N.  Jewett.  We  did  recommend  him,  and  assumed  that  his 
appointment  was  assured;  but  Harrison  —  probably  to  hu 
miliate  Mr.  Blaine  —  called  Senator  Farwell  and  me  to  him 
one  day  and  announced  that  he  had  determined  to  appoint 
Robert  T.  Lincoln  Minister  to  England. 

Farwell  was  extremely  angry,  and  wanted  to  fight  the 
nomination.  However,  I  counselled  moderation.  I  pointed 
out  that  no  criticism  could  be  made  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  and 
that  since  he  was  my  personal  friend  I  could  not  very  well 
oppose  him.  So  I  was  glad  to  favor  the  appointment,  al 
though  I  was  as  humiliated  as  my  colleague  at  the  cool  man 
ner  with  which  Harrison  had  snubbed  us  after  Mr.  Blaine's 
overtures. 

I  recollect  very  well  the  telegram  which  Mr.  Lincoln 
received  when  he  was  in  Springfield,  attending  the  business 
of  the  Pullman  Company.  It  was  from  his  office  in  Chi 
cago.  It  stated  that  there  was  a  letter  there  that  demanded 
immediate  attention,  and  asked  whether  it  should  be  for 
warded.  He  gave  instructions  to  forward  it  to  Springfield. 
It  turned  out  to  be  the  invitation  of  General  Garfield  to 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  127 

enter  his  cabinet  as  Secretary  of  War,  and  asking  an  im 
mediate  reply.  He  brought  it  to  me  in  the  Governor's  office, 
where  he  sat  down  and  wrote  his  reply  accepting  General 
Garfield's  invitation. 

But  to  return  to  General  Garfield.  He  was  not  a  strong 
executive  officer.  In  the  brief  period  in  which  he  occupied 
the  White  House,  he  did  not  make  a  good  President,  and  in 
my  judgment  would  never  have  made  a  good  one.  He 
vacillated  in  the  disposition  of  his  patronage.  When  I 
visited  him  while  he  was  yet  President-elect,  he  told  me  that 
Mr.  Conkling  would  be  with  him  the  next  day,  and  asked 
my  advice  as  to  what  he  should  say  to  him.  It  was  under 
stood  that  Conkling  was  coming  to  protest  against  the  ap 
pointment  of  Blaine  as  Secretary  of  State.  My  advice  was 
to  let  Mr.  Conkling  understand  that  he  would  appoint 
whomsoever  he  pleased  as  members  of  his  cabinet;  that  he 
would  run  the  office  of  President  without  fear  or  favor;  and 
that  he  would  appoint  Mr.  Blaine  as  Secretary  of  State  be 
cause  he  considered  him  the  very  man  best  qualified  for  that 
high  office.  Garfield  agreed  with  me,  asserting  that  I  had 
expressed  exactly  what  he  intended  saying  to  Conkling;  but 
if  we  are  to  believe  the  stories  of  Senator  Conkling's  friends, 
he  made  far  different  promises  to  Senator  Conkling  in  refer 
ence  to  this  as  also  to  other  appointments. 

But  the  culmination  of  the  trouble  between  Garfield  and 
Conkling  was  the  appointment  of  Robertson  as  Collector 
of  Customs  at  the  Port  of  New  York.  The  President  took 
the  ground,  for  his  own  reasons,  that  the  Collector  of  Cus 
toms  of  New  York  was  a  National  office,  in  which  every 
State  had  an  interest,  and  was  not  to  be  considered  as  Sen 
atorial  patronage.  Conkling  strenuously  contended  that  it 
was  exclusively  Senatorial  patronage,  and  in  this  he  was  sus 
tained  by  precedents. 


128     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

It  so  happened  that  I  was  in  Washington  when  the  trou 
ble  between  Conkling  and  Garfield  was  at  its  height,  over 
the  appointment  of  Robertson.  I  called  to  see  the  Pres 
ident  to  pay  my  respects.  He  asked  me  if  I  knew  what 
General  Logan  would  do  in  reference  to  the  nomination  of 
Mr.  Robertson.  I  told  him  I  did  not  know,  and  he  asked 
me  if  I  could  find  out,  and  to  come  to  breakfast  with  him 
next  morning.  I  did  find  out  that  General  Logan  expected 
to  stand  by  the  President,  and  I  so  reported  to  him  next 
morning. 

I  bade  him  good-bye  and  this  was  the  last  time  that  I 
ever  saw  him  alive.  I  attended  his  funeral  at  Cleveland,  and 
as  I  saw  his  body  laid  away,  I  thought  of  the  strange  ca 
price  of  fate.  Was  it  premonition  that  made  him  so  sad 
and  castdown  —  so  utterly  crushed,  as  it  seemed  to  me  — 
when  he  became  the  Republican  candidate  for  President  be 
fore  that  great  convention  of  1880?  Had  he  not  been 
elected  President,  he  would  probably  have  enjoyed  a  long, 
useful,  and  highly  creditable  public  career.  He  would  have 
been  one  of  the  most  distinguished  representatives  that 
Ohio  ever  had  in  the  upper  branch  of  Congress.  He  was  to 
a  most  eminent  degree  fitted  for  a  legislator.  In  the  na 
tional  halls  of  Congress  his  public  life  had  been  spent ;  there 
he  was  at  home.  He  was  not  at  all  fitted  for  the  position  of 
Chief  Executive  of  the  United  States.  And  I  say  this  not  in 
a  spirit  of  hostility,  but  in  the  most  kindly  way,  because  I 
loved  General  Garfield  as  one  of  my  earliest  friends,  in  those 
days  of  long  ago,  when  I  served  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Con 
gress. 

There  was  no  man  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress  with 
whom  I  was  afterwards  so  long  and  intimately  associated  as 
I  was  with  the  late  Senator  William  B.  Allison  of  Iowa, 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  129 

with  whom  I  served  in  the  Senate  for  a  quarter  of  a  cen 
tury. 

Senator  Allison  was  quite  a  prominent  member  of  the 
House  when  I  entered  Congress,  and  was  serving  then  as 
a  member  of  the  important  Ways  and  Means  Committee. 
He  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  influential  of 
the  Western  members. 

From  the  very  earliest  time  I  knew  him,  Senator  Allison 
was  an  authority  on  matters  pertaining  to  finance.  While 
he  was  in  favor  of  a  protective  tariff,  he  was  not  particularly 
a  high-tariff  advocate ;  he,  and  the  late  General  Logan  who 
was  then  in  the  House,  and  I  worked  together  on  tariff  mat 
ters,  as  against  the  high-tariff  advocates,  led  by  General 
Schenck. 

On  one  occasion  we  defeated  a  high-tariff  proposition 
that  General  Schenck  was  advocating.  He  was  furious, 
and  rising  up  in  his  place,  declared : 

"I  might  as  well  move  to  lay  the  bill  on  the  table  and  to 
write  as  its  epitaph  — 'nibbled  to  death  by  pismires ! ' 

The  remark  made  General  Logan  terribly  angry;  but 
Senator  Allison,  who  had  a  quiet,  keen  sense  of  humor,  and 
I  were  very  much  amused, —  as  much  at  the  fury  of  Logan 
as  at  the  remark  of  Schenck. 

As  a  member  of  the  House,  Senator  Allison  followed  the 
more  radical  element  against  President  Johnson.  He  was 
much  more  radical  than  I  was  in  those  days,  and  he  attacked 
President  Johnson  repeatedly  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  in 
tone  and  manner  utterly  unlike  himself  when  later  he  served 
in  the  Senate. 

In  the  upper  body  he  was  decidedly  a  conservative.  He 
never  committed  himself  until  he  was  absolutely  certain. 
He  was  always  regarded  as  a  wise  man,  and  he  exercised  an 
extraordinary  control  over  members,  in  settling  trouble- 


130     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

some  questions  and  bringing  about  harmony  in  the  Senate. 
He  had  powerful  influence,  not  only  with  members  of  his 
own  party,  but  with  members  of  the  opposition.  Every  one 
had  confidence  in  him.  His  statements  were  accepted  with 
out  question.  He  never  attempted  oratory,  but  by  cool 
statement  of  facts  he  moulded  the  opinions  of  legislators. 
He  was  one  of  those  even  tempered,  level-headed,  sound, 
sensible  men  to  whom  we  naturally  turned  when  there  were 
difficult  questions  to  settle. 

There  has  been  no  man  in  our  history  who  had  a  longer  or 
more  distinguished  public  career,  and  I  do  not  know  of  any 
man  who  was  more  often  invited  to  enter  the  cabinets  of 
different  Presidents  than  was  Senator  Allison.  The  Sec 
retaryship  of  the  Treasury  was  urged  and  almost  forced 
upon  him  repeatedly.  I  visited  Indianapolis  to  see  the 
President-elect,  Mr.  Harrison,  and  it  so  happened  that  Sen 
ator  Allison  and  I  entered  together,  Mr.  Harrison  having 
sent  for  him.  I  saw  Harrison  first,  and  he  told  me  that  he 
was  going  to  ask  Senator  Allison  to  become  his  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury.  I  assured  him  that  I  was  confident  that 
he  would  decline  the  office  —  an  assertion  that  occasioned 
much  surprise,  even  a  display  of  temper.  Mr.  Harrison 
seemed  to  think  that  it  was  Senator  Allison's  duty  to  accept 
the  place.  When  Senator  Allison  saw  him  a  short  time 
later,  the  office  was  tendered  him  and  he  promptly  declined 
to  accept  it.  Nothing  that  Mr.  Harrison  could  do  or  say 
would  induce  him  to  change  his  mind. 

Mr.  McKinley  was  anxious  to  have  Senator  Allison  in 
his  cabinet,  and  I  do  not  think  I  shall  be  violating  any  con 
fidence,  now  that  they  are  both  dead,  in  saying  that  in  de 
clining  the  appointment  Allison  urged  McKinley,  as  he 
afterwards  told  me,  to  appoint  me  as  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  and  McKinley  gave  him  so  strong  an  assurance 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  131 

that  he  intended  to  invite  me  to  enter  his  cabinet,  that  when 
Allison  saw  me  in  Washington  at  the  beginning  of  the  ses 
sion,  I  being  a  member  of  his  Committee  on  Appropria 
tions,  he  said:  "Cullom,  you  are  to  enter  the  cabinet;  now 
you  will  not  be  able  to  do  much  work  on  the  Appropriations 
Committee,  and  you  had  better  devote  your  time  to  getting 
your  affairs  in  shape  preparing  to  leave  the  Senate  and  be 
come  Secretary  of  the  Treasury." 

I  had  urged  President  McKinley  to  beg  Senator  Allison 
to  enter  his  cabinet.  Coming  from  the  source  that  Allison's 
assurance  did,  I  naturally  took  it  more  or  less  seriously,  but 
I  did  not  give  the  matter  much  thought. 

The  nearest  that  Mr.  McKinley  came  to  inviting  me  to 
enter  the  cabinet,  was  an  inquiry  he  made  of  me,  which  po 
sition  I  would  prefer  in  a  cabinet,  Secretary  of  State  or 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  I  replied  that,  personally,  I 
should  prefer  the  Treasury,  as  I  had  at  that  time  no  par 
ticular  interest  or  training  in  foreign  affairs.  I  know  now 
that  Mr.  McKinley  did  fully  intend  to  tender  to  me  the 
Treasury  portfolio,  and  I  also  know,  but  I  do  not  feel  at 
liberty  at  this  time  to  reveal,  the  influence  in  Illinois  which 
induced  him  to  change  his  mind.  I  am  very  glad  now  that 
the  position  was  not  tendered  to  me,  as  I  might  have  ac 
cepted  it,  because  of  the  known  desire  of  certain  friends  in 
this  State  to  secure  my  seat  in  the  Senate,  in  which  event  I 
should  have  been  long  since  retired  to  private  life. 

Senator  Allison  was  the  trusted  adviser  of  President  after 
President  —  Grant,  Hayes,  Garfield,  Arthur,  Harrison, 
McKinley,  Roosevelt  all  called  upon  him.  There  was  no 
Senator  who  had  to  a  greater  extent  their  confidence.  Had 
he  lived  he  would  have  been  as  close,  if  not  closer  to  Pres 
ident  Taft.  He  served  in  the  Senate  longer  than  any  other 
man  in  all  our  history.  He  broke  Benton's  long  record. 


132     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

He  broke  the  long  record  of  Senator  Morrill.  He  served 
eight  years  in  the  House  and  more  than  thirty-five  years  in 
the  Senate,  a  total  of  forty-three  years  and  five  months  in 
Congress.  For  forty-three  years  the  history  of  his  life  em 
bodies  the  complete  financial  legislative  history  of  the  United 
States. 

Another  conspicuous  member  of  the  Thirty-ninth  Con 
gress  was  Nathaniel  P.  Banks  of  Massachusetts.  He  had 
a  long,  varied,  and  interesting  career,  both  in  public  and 
private  life.  He  was  many  times  elected  to  Congress  from 
Massachusetts,  and  in  1856,  after  a  long  contest  which  lasted 
more  than  two  months,  was  elected  Speaker  of  the  House 
of  Representatives.  He  was  Governor  of  his  State,  and  in 
1861,  for  a  short  time,  president  of  the  Illinois  Central  Rail 
road,  from  which  position  he  resigned  to  enter  the  Union 
army  as  a  major-general,  serving  throughout  the  war. 

I  did  not  know  him  when  he  was  stationed  at  Chicago, 
but  I  became  very  well  acquainted  with  him  in  Congress. 
He  was  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs, 
of  which  committee  I  was  a  member.  Not  only  was  Gen 
eral  Banks  a  polite,  agreeable  man,  but  he  was  an  excep 
tionally  effective  speaker,  and  very  popular  in  the  House. 

There  occurs  to  me  a  little  controversy  which  he  had  with 
the  late  Senator  Dawes,  who  was  at  that  time  a  member  of 
the  House  from  Massachusetts. 

General  Banks  was  undertaking  to  pass  a  bill  to  which 
Mr.  Dawes  objected.  Banks  was  nettled.  Taking  the 
floor,  he  accused  his  colleague  of  always  objecting  to  bills 
he  attempted  to  pass.  Dawes  arose  in  his  place,  and  in  the 
most  ponderous  fashion,  turned  to  Banks. 

"I  appeal  to  my  colleague,"  he  asked,  "when  did  I  ever 
Before  object  to  any  bill  which  he  was  attempting  to  pass?  " 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  133 

Banks  jumped  to  his  feet,  and  said  in  his  high-pitched 
voice:  "I  do  not  know  that  my  colleague  ever  did,  but  I 
always  thought  that  he  was  just  about  to." 

General  Banks  served  during  the  six  years  that  I  was  a 
member  of  the  House,  and  several  terms  afterwards,  his 
public  service  ending  with  the  Fifty-first  Congress.  He 
died  at  his  home  in  Massachusetts,  in  1894. 

Daniel  W.  Voorhees  was  another  celebrated  member  of 
the  Thirty-ninth  Congress,  and  was  later  a  Senator  from 
Indiana.  Senator  Voorhees  was  a  very  able  man  and  a 
zealous,  consistent  Democrat.  He  was  charged,  and  I  have 
no  dqubt  at  all  that  it  was  true,  with  being  a  Rebel  sympa 
thizer,  and  a  prominent  member  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Golden  Circle.  A  fine,  gifted  speaker,  a  kind-hearted  gen 
tleman,  he  was  very  popular  with  the  people  of  Indiana. 
Dan  Voorhees  and  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  who  was  after 
wards  Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  were  the  two 
most  prominent  Democrats  of  Indiana  in  all  its  history,  and 
indeed  were  two  of  the  foremost  Democrats  of  the  North. 

Senator  Voorhees'  seat,  as  a  member  of  the  House  in  the 
Thirty-ninth  Congress,  was  successfully  contested;  and  I 
can  see  him  now,  with  his  imposing  presence,  making  his 
final  speech  in  the  House,  after  the  result  of  the  contest  had 
become  known.  Garbed  in  a  long  cloak,  he  defended  his 
right  to  his  seat  with  the  greatest  dignity.  The  vote  was 
taken;  his  opponent  was  seated;  then  he  drew  his  cloak 
about  him,  and  with  the  air  of  a  king,  walked  out  of  the 
House,  almost  triumphantly.  I  had  voted  against  him,  but 
the  dignity  with  which  he  carried  off  the  occasion  certainly 
commanded  my  deepest  admiration. 

He  was  a  great  admirer  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  He  knew  him 
well;  had  been  associated  with  him  in  many  lawsuits  on  the 
circuit,  at  Danville,  and  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State; 


134     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  although  they  belonged  to  opposing  political  parties,  he 
evinced  for  Lincoln  a  very  warm  feeling. 

Senator  Voorhees  once  told  me  a  rather  interesting  story 
in  connection  with  President  Lincoln.  It  was  the  occasion 
of  the  dedication  of  what  was  known  as  the  Foundery 
Methodist  Church  in  Washington.  Mr.  Lincoln  was  pres 
ent,  Voorhees  was  there,  and  Bishop  Simpson  delivered  the 
dedicatory  address.  The  bishop  was  an  eloquent  speaker 
and  his  sermon  was  a  characteristic  one.  The  President 
was  seated  in  an  armchair  in  front  of  the  pulpit,  with 
his  back  to  the  minister,  and  after  the  sermon  was  over,  an 
effort  was  at  once  made  to  raise  funds  to  pay  the  debt  of 
the  church.  This  phase  of  the  meeting  was  tiresomely  pro 
tracted,  the  minister,  in  the  customary  style,  earnestly  urg 
ing  an  unresponsive  congregation  to  contribute  until 
nearly  every  inducement  had  been  exhausted.  Finally 
somebody  started  a  movement  to  raise  a  certain  definite 
amount  of  money,  the  achievement  of  which  would  make  the 
President  a  life  member  of  some  church  society.  But  even 
this  scheme  was  not  accepted  with  much  enthusiasm,  and 
Bishop  Simpson  renewed  his  plea  for  donations.  At  last 
Mr.  Lincoln,  who  had  been  growing  tired  and  bored  at  the 
performance,  craned  his  head  around  toward  Bishop  Simp 
son,  and  said  in  a  tone  that  everybody  heard:  "Simpson, 
if  you  will  stop  this  auction  I  will  pay  the  money  myself." 

And  since  Bishop  Simpson's  name  has  been  mentioned, 
another  incident  in  which  he  figured  is  suggested,  which 
might  as  well  be  related  here. 

In  the  Methodist  Church  Bishop  Simpson's  name  is  a 
household  word.  He  was  one  of  its  most  prominent  divines, 
and  in  sympathy  with  that  branch  which  remained  loyal  to 
the  Union.  Naturally  he  was  a  great  admirer  of  Mr.  Lin 
coln  —  in  fact,  so  close  was  he  to  the  President  that  it  was 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  135 

his  influence  that  secured  the  appointment  of  Senator  Har- 
lan  of  Iowa  as  Secretary  of  the  Interior.  What  follows 
will  demonstrate  that  this  statement  is  not  made  on  hear 
say. 

Several  prominent  men  of  Illinois,  and  other  parts  of  the 
country,  were  in  Washington  trying  to  secure  the  appoint 
ment  of  Uncle  Jesse  K.  Dubois  (the  father  of  Senator  Du- 
bois  of  Idaho  who  served  in  the  United  States  Senate  two 
terms  with  great  credit  to  himself  and  State) ,  as  Secretary  of 
the  Interior.  Uncle  Jesse  Dubois  was  there  himself,  and  we 
all  met  one  evening  at  the  National  Hotel,  at  which  meet 
ing  I  was  designated  to  go  to  the  White  House  and  use  my 
influence  with  President  Lincoln  in  Uncle  Jesse's  behalf. 
Uncle  Jesse  had  no  business  coming  to  Washington  when  he 
was  being  pushed  for  a  cabinet  office;  but  he  did,  neverthe 
less,  and  he  was  not  in  good  health.  About  ten  o'clock  at 
night  I  saw  the  President,  and  laid  before  him  Uncle  Jesse's 
claims.  His  reply  was : 

"I  cannot  appoint  him.  I  must  appoint  Senator  Harlan. 
I  promised  Bishop  Simpson  to  do  so.  The  Methodist 
Church  has  been  standing  by  me  very  generally;  I  agreed 
with  Bishop  Simpson  to  give  Senator  Harlan  this  place,  and 
I  must  keep  my  agreement.  I  would  like  to  take  care  of 
Uncle  Jesse,  but  I  do  not  see  that  I  can  as  a  member  of  my 
cabinet." 

I  replied:  "If  you  have  determined  it,  that  is  the  end  of 
the  matter,  and  I  shall  so  report  to  the  friends  who  are  gath 
ered  at  the  National,  so  that  Uncle  Jesse  may  go  on  home." 

President  Lincoln  seemed  much  affected.  He  followed 
me  to  the  door,  repeating  that  he  would  like  to  take  care  of 
Uncle  Jesse,  but  could  not  do  so. 

Jesse  Dubois  went  home  to  Springfield,  but  he  remained 
as  stanch  a  friend  to  Lincoln  as  ever,  and  was  one  of  the 


136     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

committee  sent  from  Springfield  to  accompany  the  remains 
of  the  immortal  President  to  their  last  resting-place. 

George  S.  Boutwell  was  another  member  of  the  Thirty- 
ninth  Congress  who  merits  some  attention.  He  afterwards 
became  very  influential  among  the  radical  element,  and  was 
one  of  the  managers  on  the  part  of  the  House  in  the  im 
peachment  of  President  Johnson.  It  is  hard  to  understand 
in  a  man  of  his  sober,  sound  sense;  but  I  am  convinced  that 
he  firmly  believed  President  Johnson  to  have  been  a  con 
spirator  in  securing  the  assassination  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  He 
was  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under  President  Grant,  who 
had  for  him  the  greatest  respect  and  confidence.  I  never 
was  very  intimate  with  him,  but  I  knew  him  fairly  well,  and 
considered  him  one  of  the  leading  public  men  of  Massachu 
setts  of  his  day. 

One  of  the  leading  members  of  the  Pennsylvania  dele 
gation  in  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress  was  William  D.  Kelly. 
He  was  a  prominent  member  of  the  House,  a  good  speaker, 
although  he  always  prepared  his  addresses  at  great  length, 
principally  on  the  tariff;  but  he  did  not  confine  himself 
to  his  manuscripts  entirely.  His  specialty  in  Congress  was 
the  tariff.  He  was  called  "Pig-iron  Kelly"  because  he  was 
for  high  duties  on  pig-iron  and,  in  fact,  everything  man 
ufactured  in  Pennsylvania.  That  State,  as  everybody 
knows,  is  the  great  iron  and  steel  manufacturing  State  of 
the  Union,  and  its  representatives  in  Congress  were  in  that 
day,  as  they  are  in  this,  the  highest  of  high  protective  tariff 
advocates. 

Before  entering  Congress,  William  D.  Kelly  for  a  num 
ber  of  years  had  been  a  judge  of  one  of  the  more  important 
courts  of  Philadelphia.  He  was  elected  to  and  kept  in  the 
House,  without  any  particular  effort  on  his  own  part,  be 
cause  he  was  considered  one  of  the  most  valuable  men  in 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  137 

Congress  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  tariff.  When  I  was 
a  candidate  for  reelection  to  the  House  he  visited  my  district 
and  made  several  very  able  speeches  for  me  at  my  request, 
and,  with  his  wife,  was  my  guest  in  Springfield  for  several 
days.  At  that  time  Republicans  were  for  a  high  protective 
tariff,  and  it  was  not  considered  then,  as  it  seems  to  be  in 
these  days  of  so-called  insurgency,  a  crime  for  a  Republican 
to  stand  up  and  say  that  he  was  in  favor  of  high  tariff  duties. 
In  any  event,  Judge  Kelly  did  me  much  good  in  the  speeches 
he  made  in  my  district. 

We  occupied  apartments  in  the  same  house  in  Washing 
ton —  on  F  Street  near  the  Ebbitt  House,  at  which  hotel 
we  took  our  meals.  F  Street  is  now  the  heart  of  the  business 
centre,  but  it  was  then  one  of  the  principal  residence  streets, 
and  many  Representatives  and  Senators  lived  in  that  vicin 
ity.  The  only  objection  I  had  to  living  in  the  same  house 
with  Judge  Kelly  was  that  he  was  always  preparing 
speeches,  and  when  he  got  ready  to  deliver  a  speech  he  would 
insist  on  reading  it  all  over  to  me;  and  as  his  speeches  were 
generally  two  or  three  hours  long,  and  always  on  the  tariff, 
in  which  I  did  not  take  an  extraordinary  amount  of  inter 
est,  I  became  pretty  tired  of  hearing  them. 

On  one  occasion  when  he  was  making  quite  an  eloquent 
speech  in  the  House,  he  was  interrupted  by  a  member  from 
Kentucky,  whose  name  I  do  not  remember.  He  had  already 
answered  him  once  or  twice  and  then  gone  on.  He  was  in 
terrupted  again,  and  this  time  he  answered:  "Oh,  don't 
interrupt  me  when  the  glow  is  on."  The  "glow  "  did  hap 
pen  to  be  on  at  that  time,  and  naturally  he  did  not  desire  to 
be  interrupted. 

In  the  same  Pennsylvania  delegation  there  were  two  mem 
bers  named  Charles  O'Neil  and  Leonard  Meyer,  who  were 
very  short  in  stature.  For  some  reason  or  other,  some  wag 


138     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

dubbed  them  "Kelly's  ponies."  They  heard  of  it  and  be 
came  very  angry,  and  on  every  occasion,  when  there  was 
half  a  chance,  they  watched  to  see  how  Judge  Kelly  voted 
and  would  then  vote  the  opposite. 

They  were  both  good  men  and  good  Republicans,  and 
O'Neil  served  the  same  number  of  terms  as  Judge  Kelly  — 
fifteen  —  but  O'Neil  remained  his  full  fifteen  terms  and  re 
tired  from  Congress.  Judge  Kelly  was  serving  his  fifteenth 
term  when  he  died  in  Washington,  in  1890. 

Samuel  J.  Randall  was  one  of  the  prominent  Democrats 
of  his  day ;  but  strange  to  say  he  favored  a  protective  tariff. 
He  also  served  about  fifteen  terms,  two  of  them  in  the 
Speaker's  chair.  He  had  an  anxious  solicitude  for  the 
success  of  his  party,  and  made  many  political  speeches. 
He  was  a  young  member  when  I  first  knew  him,  away 
back  in  the  sixties,  but  even  then  he  occupied  an  influential 
position. 

I  remember  meeting  him  in  Mr.  Elaine's  office  one  day, 
when  the  latter  was  Secretary  of  State,  and  Mr.  Elaine  not 
being  in,  we  sat  on  the  settee  and  had  a  talk.  He  was  in 
poor  health,  but  curious  respecting  the  relations  between 
President  Harrison  and  his  party.  I  told  him  they  were 
not  getting  along  very  well ;  that  he  satisfied  his  party  about 
as  well  as  Mr.  Cleveland  satisfied  his  when  he  was  in  the 
White  House. 

"I  think,"  he  observed,  "he  is  better  than  our  President. 
We  never  could  do  much  with  Cleveland."  Then  he  added 
this  characteristic  remark:  "If  you  want  an  army  to  fight, 
you  must  feed  it.  It  is  the  same  with  a  political  party:  if 
a  party  is  to  take  care  of  itself,  its  workers  must  be  recog 
nized  in  the  distribution  of  its  patronage." 

I  never  saw  Samuel  J.  Randall  afterwards. 

Judge  Godlove  S.  Orth  was  one  of  my  most  intimate 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  139 

friends  in  the  House  of  Representatives.  He  was  a  splen 
did  man,  and  was  regarded  as  an  honorable  and  able  mem 
ber.  He  and  I  saw  much  of  each  other  every  day,  as  we 
roomed  in  the  same  neighborhood  and  generally  visited  the 
departments  together.  We  were  seen  with  each  other  so 
often  on  the  streets,  in  fact,  that  when  we  were  separated, 
friends  would  ask  either  one  or  the  other  of  us:  "What  has 
become  of  your  partner?  "  At  one  time  I  canvassed  his  dis 
trict  for  him  and  he  was  reflected. 

He  had  a  peculiar  name,  "Godlove."  I  never  heard  of  a 
man  named  Godlove,  either  before  or  since.  The  story  was 
told  of  a  lady  sitting  in  the  gallery,  listening  to  the  pro 
ceedings  of  the  House.  She  could  not  hear  very  well. 
When  the  roll  was  being  called,  and  she  heard  the  name 
"Godlove"  called  by  the  clerk,  she  did  not  understand  it; 
she  went  down  stairs  and  told  her  friends  that  the  House  of 
Representatives  was  a  most  pious  body ;  that  every  time  they 
called  the  roll,  and  the  clerk  got  about  half  way  through, 
he  would  stop  and  exclaim:  "God  love  us  all!" 

Judge  Orth  has  been  dead  for  many  years,  but  I  have 
always  remembered  with  great  pleasure  our  friendship 
when  we  served  as  colleagues  in  the  House,  nearly  half  a 
century  ago. 

Oakes  Ames  of  Boston  was  a  prominent  .member  of  the 
House.  He  had  charge  of  the  Union  Pacific  Railroad  con 
struction,  and  it  was  charged  —  and  proven,  I  believe,  after 
wards  —  that  he  secured  the  concessions  for  the  railroad  by 
undue  influence, —  the  use  of  money,  gifts  of  stock,  etc., — 
and  the  whole  thing  finally  culminated  in  what  is  known  as 
the  Credit  Mobilier  scandal,  the  exposure  of  which  came  after 
I  retired  from  the  House. 

Ames  was  a  member  of  the  Thirty-eighth,  Thirty-ninth, 
Fortieth,  Forty-first,  and  Forty-second  Congresses,  and  I 


140     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

knew  him  very  well  during  my  six  years'  service.  I  was 
made  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Territories  in  the  For 
ty-first  Congress,  by  Mr.  Elaine,  who  was  then  Speaker. 
Ames  annoyed  me  very  much  by  coming  to  me  almost  every 
day  in  the  interest  of  legislation  in  the  Territories  affecting 
the  Union  Pacific,  and  I  asked  him  one  day,  being  a  little 
out  of  temper,  whether  he  was  so  absorbed  in  the  Pacific 
Railroad  that  he  had  no  time  to  devote  to  anything  else.  He 
made  some  light  rejoinder;  sometime  later  the  exposure 
came,  and  I  found  that  he  was  engaged  in  most  unfortunate 
and  unlawful  practices  in  securing  legislation  in  the  interest 
of  his  road. 

I  never  believed  that  Oakes  Ames  was  naturally  a  dis 
honest  man,  but  the  proof  was  against  him,  and  the  scandal 
resulted  in  his  death,  as  it  also  did  in  the  death  of  James 
Brooks,  of  New  York,  and  the  ruination  of  other  public 
men. 

I  knew  S.  S.  Cox  ("Sunset"  Cox,  as  he  was  called),  as  a 
member  of  the  Forty-first  Congress.  He  had  served  in 
some  previous  Congress  as  a  member  from  Ohio;  but  when 
I  knew  him  he  was  serving  as  a  member  from  New  York. 

Cox  was  an  able  man,  as  a  speaker,  a  writer,  and  a  diplo 
mat.  He  was  always  listened  to  with  great  respect  and  at 
tention  when  he  addressed  the  House,  but  a  considerable 
amount  of  fun  was  poked  at  him  after  a  certain  occasion 
when  he  had  interrupted  General  Butler  a  time  or  two  in 
debate,  and  the  General,  finally  losing  patience,  replied  to 
one  of  his  questions  with  the  admonition:  "  Shoo,  fly,  don't 
bodder  mel "  I  was  present  at  the  time;  the  galleries  were 
filled,  as  they  always  were  in  those  days ;  and  when  General 
Butler  uttered  this  reproof  the  whole  House,  galleries,  and 
floor,  was  in  an  uproar,  maintaining  the  confusion  for  some 
minutes.  When  it  seemed  like  subsiding,  it  would  break 


THIRTY-NINTH  CONGRESS  141 

out  again  and  again,  and  so  it  continued  for  quite  a  while. 
When  order  was  finally  restored  Cox  undertook  to  reply; 
but  he  could  not  do  so.  He  had  been  so  crippled  by  the 
response  of  the  audience  to  Butler's  remark  that  he  never 
recovered  from  it. 

Cox  was  a  splendid  man.  He  always  thought  in  those  days 
that  he  had  not  been  quite  appreciated  by  his  friends  in  the 
Democratic  party,  and  they  thought  the  same  way;  but  he 
was  so  good-humored,  and  such  a  whole-souled  man  and 
so  fond  of  wit  that  he  really  never  did  get  what  he  was  en 
titled  to. 

I  was  trying  to  pass  a  bill  which  I  had  prepared  for  the 
purpose  of  prohibiting  and  wiping  out  polygamy  in  Utah. 
I  had  reported  the  bill  from  the  Committee  on  Territories, 
and  was  doing  my  best  to  pass  it.  For  some  reason  or 
other  (afterwards  I  learned  it  was  an  ulterior  reason  to  help 
out  a  friend),  General  Schenck  undertook  to  defeat  the 
measure,  and  for  this  purpose  he  asked  to  have  it  referred  to 
the  Committee  on  Judiciary.  This  committee  probably  had 
jurisdiction  over  the  subject;  I  did  not  think  so  at  the  time, 
and  believed  that  such  a  reference  would  kill  the  bill.  He 
seemed  to  be  making  some  headway  with  the  Republicans, 
when  Cox  came  over  to  me  from  the  Democratic  side  of  the 
House,  and  proposed  that  if  I  would  yield  to  him  for  five 
minutes  he  would  help  me  to  pass  the  bill.  I  told  him  to 
go  back  to  his  seat  and  that  I  would  yield  to  him  directly. 
When  I  did  Cox  took  the  floor,  and  to  my  utter  astonishment 
he  denounced  the  bill  as  the  most  outrageous  bill  that  had 
ever  been  brought  before  the  House,  declaring  in  the  most 
spirited  manner  that  of  course  it  ought  to  be  referred  to 
the  Judiciary  Committee,  because  every  one  knew  that  such 
a  reference  would  kill  it. 

But  he  was  shrewder  than  I  apprehended  at  the  moment. 


142     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

His  talk  had  the  desired  effect,  for  the  Republicans  who  had 
been  following  Schenck  determined  that  they  would  not  be 
responsible  for  killing  the  bill;  they  came  back  to  me,  and 
the  measure  was  passed  through  the  House  by  a  substantial 
majority. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   IMPEACHMENT   OF    PRESIDENT   JOHNSON 

1865 

AS  I  look  back  now  over  the  vista  of  the  years  that  have 
come  and  gone,  it  seems  to  me  that  I  entered  the 
Lower  House  of  Congress  just  at  the  beginning  of  the  most 
important  period  in  all  our  history.  The  great  President 
had  been  assassinated;  the  war  was  over;  Andrew  Johnson, 
a  Union  Democrat,  was  President  of  the  United  States. 
Reconstruction  was  the  problem  which  confronted  us,  how 
to  heal  up  the  Nation's  wounds  and  remake  a  Union  which 
would  endure  for  all  time  to  come.  These  were  the  difficult 
conditions  that  had  to  be  dealt  with  by  the  Thirty-ninth 
Congress. 

Andrew  Johnson  was  the  queerest  character  that  ever 
occupied  the  White  House,  and,  with  the  exception  of  Lin 
coln  only,  he  entered  it  under  the  most  trying  and  difficult 
circumstances  in  all  our  history;  but  Lincoln  had,  what 
Johnson  lacked,  the  support  and  confidence  of  the  great 
Republican  party.  Johnson  was  never  a  Republican,  and 
never  pretended  to  be  one.  He  was  a  lifelong  Democrat, 
and  a  slave-holder  as  well;  but  he  was  loyal  to  the  Union, 
no  man  living  more  so.  As  a  Senator  from  Tennessee,  alone 
of  all  the  Southern  Senators  he  faced  his  colleagues  from 
the  South  in  denouncing  secession  as  treason.  His  subse 
quent  phenomenal  course  in  armed  opposition  to  the  rebel- 

143 


144     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

lion  brought  about  his  nomination  for  the  Vice-Presidency 
as  a  shrewd  stroke  to  secure  the  support  of  the  War  Demo 
crats  of  the  North  and  the  Union  men  of  his  State  and 
section. 

He  came  to  the  Presidency  under  the  cloud  of  President 
Lincoln's  assassination,  when  the  majority  of  the  North  be 
lieved  that  a  Southern  conspiracy  had  laid  the  great  Presi 
dent  low.  The  seceding  States  hated  him  as  a  traitor  to  his 
own  section;  the  North  distrusted  him  as  a  Democrat.  At 
first  I  believe  the  very  radical  element  of  the  Republican 
party  in  Congress,  led  by  old  Ben  Wade  of  Ohio,  than  whom 
there  was  no  more  unsafe  man  in  either  house  of  Congress, 
were  disposed,  if  not  openly  to  rejoice,  which  they  dared  not 
do,  to  see  with  some  secret  satisfaction  the  entrance  of  John 
son  into  the  White  House.  It  is  well  known  that  Wade  did 
say  in  his  first  interview  with  President  Johnson,  when,  as 
a  member  of  the  committee  on  the  conduct  of  the  war,  he 
waited  on  him,  "Johnson,  we  have  faith  in  you.  By  the 
gods,  there  will  be  no  more  trouble  in  running  the  Govern 
ment." 

I  have  already,  in  another  chapter,  described  the  scene 
which  took  place  in  the  Senate  chamber  when  Johnson  was 
inducted  into  office  as  Vice-President ;  the  exhibition  he  made 
of  himself  at  the  time  of  taking  the  oath  of  office,  in  the 
presence  of  the  President  of  the  United  States  and  the  rep 
resentatives  of  the  Governments  of  the  world.  All  this,  ad 
vertised  at  the  time  in  the  opposition  press,  added  to  the 
prejudice  against  Johnson  in  the  North  and  made  his  posi 
tion  more  trying  and  difficult. 

There  were  two  striking  points  in  Johnson's  character, 
and  I  knew  him  well:  first,  his  loyalty  to  the  Union;  and, 
second,  his  utter  fearlessness  of  character.  He  could  not  be 
cowed;  old  Ben  Wade,  Sumner,  Stevens,  all  the  great  lead- 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  145 

ers  of  that  day  could  not,  through  fear,  influence  him  one 
particle. 

In  1861,  when  he  was  being  made  the  target  of  all  sorts  of 
threats  on  account  of  his  solitary  stand  against  secession  in 
the  Senate,  he  let  fall  this  characteristic  utterance: 

"I  want  to  say,  not  boastingly,  with  no  anger  in  my 
bosom,  that  these  two  eyes  of  mine  have  never  looked  upon 
anything  in  the  shape  of  mortal  man  that  this  heart  has 
feared." 

This  utterance  probably  illustrates  Johnson's  character 
more  clearly  than  anything  that  I  could  say.  He  sought 
rather  than  avoided  a  fight.  Headstrong,  domineering, 
having  fought  his  way  in  a  State  filled  with  aristocratic 
Southerners,  from  the  class  of  so-called  "low  whites"  to  the 
highest  position  in  the  United  States,  he  did  not  readily  yield 
to  the  dictates  of  the  dominating  forces  in  Congress. 

Lincoln  had  a  well-defined  policy  of  reconstruction.  In 
deed,  so  liberal  was  he  disposed  to  be  in  his  treatment  of  the 
Southern  States,  that  immediately  after  the  surrender  of 
Richmond  he  would  have  recognized  the  old  State  Govern 
ment  of  Virginia  had  it  not  been  for  the  peremptory  veto  of 
Stanton.  Congress  was  not  in  session  when  Johnson  came 
to  the  Presidency  in  April,  1865.  To  do  him  no  more  than 
simple  justice,  I  firmly  believe  that  he  wanted  to  follow  out, 
in  reconstruction,  what  he  thought  was  the  policy  of  Mr. 
Lincoln,  and  in  this  he  was  guided  largely  by  the  advice  of 
Mr.  Seward. 

But  there  was  this  difference.  Johnson  was,  probably  in 
good  faith,  pursuing  the  Lincoln  policy  of  reconstruction; 
but  when  the  Legislatures  and  Executives  of  the  Southern 
States  began  openly  passing  laws  and  executing  them  so 
that  the  negro  was  substantially  placed  back  into  slavery, 
practically  nullifying  the  results  of  the  awful  struggle,  the 


146     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

untold  loss  of  life  and  treasure,  Mr.  Lincoln  certainly  would 
have  receded  and  would  have  dealt  with  the  South  with  an 
iron  hand,  as  Congress  had  determined  to  do,  and  as  General 
Grant  was  compelled  to  do  when  he  assumed  the  Presi 
dency. 

From  April  to  the  reassembling  of  Congress  in  December, 
Johnson  had  a  free  hand  in  dealing  with  the  seceding  States, 
and  he  was  not  slow  to  take  advantage  of  it.  He  seemed 
disposed  to  recognize  the  old  State  Governments ;  to  restrict 
the  suffrage  to  the  whites;  to  exercise  freely  the  pardoning 
power  in  the  way  of  extending  executive  clemency  not  only 
to  almost  all  classes,  but  to  every  individual  who  would  ap 
ply  for  it.  The  result  was,  it  seemed  to  be  certain  that  if 
the  Johnson  policy  were  carried  out  to  the  fullest  extent, 
the  supremacy  of  the  Republican  party  in  the  councils  of  the 
Nation  would  be  at  stake. 

To  express  it  in  a  word,  the  motive  of  the  opposition  to 
the  Johnson  plan  of  reconstruction  was  the  firm  conviction 
that  its  success  would  wreck  the  Republican  party,  and  by 
restoring  the  Democrats  to  power  bring  back  Southern  su 
premacy  and  Northern  vassalage.  The  impeachment,  in  a 
word,  was  a  culmination  of  the  struggle  between  the  legis 
lative  and  the  executive  departments  of  the  Government 
over  the  problem  of  reconstruction.  The  legislative  depart 
ment  claimed  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  reconstruction;  the 
executive  claimed  that  it  alone  was  competent  to  deal  with 
the  subject. 

This  is  a  very  brief  summary  of  the  conditions  which  con 
fronted  us  when  I  entered  the  Thirty-ninth  Congress. 
Representatives  of  the  eleven  seceding  States  were  there  to 
claim  their  seats  in  Congress.  The  Republican  members  met 
in  caucus  the  Saturday  evening  preceding  the  meeting  of 
Congress  on  Monday.  I,  as  a  member-elect,  was  present, 


if- 


ANDREW    JOHNSON 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  147 

and  I  remember  how  old  Thaddeus  Stevens  at  once  assumed 
the  dominating  control  in  opposition  to  the  President's  plan. 
Stevens  was  a  most  remarkable  character, —  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  in  the  legislative  history  of  the  United  States. 
He  believed  firmly  in  negro  equality  and  negro  suffrage. 
As  one  writer  eloquently  expresses  it : 

"According  to  his  creed,  the  insurgent  States  were  conquered  provinces 
to  be  shaped  into  a  paradise  for  the  freedman  and  a  hell  for  the  rebel. 
His  eye  shot  over  the  blackened  southern  land;  he  saw  the  carnage, 
the  desolation,  the  starvation,  and  the  shame;  and  like  a  battered  old 
warhorse,  he  flung  up  his  frontlet,  sniffed  the  tainted  breeze,  and  snorted 
'Ha,  Ha!'" 

It  was  at  once  determined  by  the  Republican  majority  in 
Congress  that  the  representatives  of  the  eleven  seceding 
States  should  not  be  admitted.  The  Constitution  expressly 
gives  to  the  House  and  Senate  the  exclusive  power  to  judge 
of  the  admission  and  qualification  of  its  own  members. 

We  were  surprised  at  the  moderation  of  the  President's 
message,  which  came  in  on  Tuesday  after  Congress  assem 
bled.  In  tone  and  general  character  the  message  was 
wholly  unlike  Johnson.  It  was  an  admirable  state  docu 
ment,  one  of  the  finest  from  a  literary  and  probably  from 
every  other  standpoint  that  ever  came  from  an  Executive 
to  Congress.  It  was  thought  at  the  time  that  Mr.  Seward 
wrote  it,  but  it  has  since  been  asserted  that  it  was  the  product 
of  that  foremost  of  American  historians,  J.  C.  Bancroft,  one 
of  Mr.  Johnson's  close  personal  friends. 

There  existed  three  theories  of  dealing  with  the  Southern 
States:  one  was  the  President's  theory  of  recognizing  the 
State  Governments,  allowing  the  States  to  deal  with  the  suf 
frage  question  as  they  might  see  fit;  the  Stevens  policy  of 
wiping  out  all  State  lines  and  dealing  with  the  regions  as 
conquered  military  provinces;  and  the  Sumner  theory  of 


148     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

treating  them  as  organized  territories,  recognizing  the  State 
lines. 

Johnson  dealt  in  a  masterful  manner  with  the  subject  in 
his  message.  He  said : 

"States,  with  proper  limitations  of  power,  are  essential  to  the  existence 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

"The  perpetuity  of  the  Constitution  brings  with  it  the  perpetuity  of 
the  States;  their  mutual  relations  makes  us  what  we  are,  and  in  our 
political  system  this  connection  is  indissoluble.  The  whole  cannot  exist 
without  the  parts  nor  the  parts  without  the  whole.  So  long  as  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  endures,  the  States  will  endure; 
the  destruction  of  the  one  is  the  destruction  of  the  other;  the  preserva 
tion  of  the  one  is  the  preservation  of  the  other. 

"The,  true  theory  is  that  all  pretended  acts  of  secession  were,  from 
the  beginning,  null  and  void.  The  States  cannot  commit  treason,  nor 
screen  the  individual  citizens  who  may  have  committed  treason,  any 
more  than  they  can  make  valid  treaties  or  engage  in  lawful  commerce 
with  any  foreign  power.  The  States  attempting  to  secede  placed  them 
selves  in  a  condition  where  their  vitality  was  impaired  but  not  extin 
guished,  their  functions  suspended  but  not  destroyed." 

It  was  but  the  Johnson  theory  which  we  presented  to  the 
world,  denying  the  right  of  any  State  to  secede;  asserting 
the  perpetuity,  the  indissolubility  of  the  Union. 

But  the  question  was,  whether  the  members  from  the  se 
ceding  States  should  be  admitted  to  the  Senate  and  House; 
and  he  dealt  with  this  most  difficult  problem  in  a  statesman 
like  way.  He  said: 

"The  amendment  to  the  Constitution  being  adopted,  it  would  remain 
for  the  States  whose  powers  have  been  so  long  in  abeyance,  to  resume 
their  places  in  the  two  branches  of  the  National  Legislature,  and  thereby 
complete  the  work  of  restoration.  Here  it  is  for  you,  fellow  citizens 
of  the  Senate,  and  for  you,  fellow  citizens  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tires,  to  judge,  each  of  you  for  yourselves,  of  the  elections,  returns  and 
qualifications  of  your  own  members." 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  149 

On  the  suffrage  question,  he  said: 

"On  the  propriety  of  making  freedman  electors  by  proclamation  of 
the  Executive,  I  took  for  my  counsel  the  Constitution  itself,  the  inter 
pretations  of  that  instrument  by  its  authors,  and  their  contemporaries, 
and  the  recent  legislation  of  Congress.  They  all  unite  in  inculcating 
the  doctrine  that  the  regulation  of  the  suffrage  is  a  power  exclusively 
for  the  States.  So  fixed  was  this  reservation  of  power  in  the  habits 
of  the  people,  and  so  unquestioned  has  been  the  interpretation  of  the 
Constitution,  that  during  the  Civil  War  the  late  President  never  har 
bored  the  purpose, —  certainly  never  avowed  it, —  of  disregarding  it ; 
and  in  acts  of  Congress  nothing  can  be  found  to  sanction  any  departure 
by  the  Executive  from  a  policy  which  has  so  uniformly  obtained." 

Aside  from  the  worst  radicals,  the  message  pleased  every 
one,  the  country  at  large  and  the  majority  in  Congress;  and 
there  was  a  general  disposition  to  give  the  President  a 
reasonably  free  hand  in  working  out  his  plan  of  reconstruc 
tion.  But  as  I  stated,  the  Legislatures  of  the  Southern 
States  and  their  Executives  assumed  so  domineering  an  atti 
tude,  practically  wiping  out  the  results  of  the  war,  that  the 
Republican  majority  in  Congress  assumed  it  to  be  its  duty 
to  take  control  from  the  Executive. 

What  determined  Johnson  in  his  course,  I  do  not  know. 
It  was  thought  that  he  would  be  a  radical  of  radicals.  Be 
ing  of  the  "poor  white"  class,  he  may  have  been  flattered  by 
the  attentions  showered  on  him  by  the  old  Southern  aristo 
crats.  Writers  of  this  period  have  frequently  given  that  as 
a  reason.  My  own  belief  has  been  that  he  was  far  too  strong 
a  man  to  be  governed  in  so  vital  a  matter  by  so  trivial  a 
cause.  My  conviction  is  that  the  radical  Republican  lead 
ers  in  the  House  were  right;  that  he  believed  in  the  old 
Democratic  party,  aside  from  his  loyalty  to  the  Union;  and 
was  a  Democrat  determined  to  turn  the  Government  over 
to  the  Democratic  party,  reconstructed  on  a  Union  basis. 


150     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

I  cannot  undertake  to  go  into  all  the  long  details  of  that 
memorable  struggle.  As  I  look  back  over  the  history  of  it 
now,  it  seems  to  me  to  bear  a  close  resemblance  to  the  begin 
ning  of  the  French  Revolution,  to  the  struggle  between  the 
States  General  of  France  and  Louis  XVI.  Might  we  not, 
if  things  had  turned  differently,  drifted  into  chaos  and  revo 
lution?  If  Johnson  had  been  impeached  and  refused  to  sub 
mit,  adopting  the  same  tactics  as  did  Stanton  in  retaining 
the  War  Department;  had  Ben  Wade  taken  the  oath  of 
office  and  demanded  possession,  Heaven  only  knows  what 
might  have  been  the  result. 

But  reminiscing  in  this  way,  as  I  cannot  avoid  doing  when 
I  think  back  over  those  terrible  times,  I  lose  the  continuity 
of  my  subject. 

An  extension  to  the  Freedman's  Bureau  bill  was  passed, 
was  promptly  vetoed  by  the  Executive,  the  veto  was  as 
promptly  overruled  by  the  House,  where  there  was  no  sub 
stantial  opposition,  but  the  Senate  failed  to  pass  the  bill,  the 
veto  of  the  President  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 

I  had  not  the  remotest  idea  that  Johnson  would  dare  to 
veto  the  Freedman's  Bureau  bill,  and  I  made  a  speech  on 
the  subject,  declaring  a  firm  conviction  to  that  effect.  A 
veto  at  that  time  was  almost  unheard  of.  Except  during 
the  administration  of  Tyler,  no  important  bill  had  ever  been 
vetoed  by  an  Executive.  It  came  as  a  shock  to  Congress 
and  the  country.  Excitement  reigned  supreme.  The  ques 
tion  was:  "Should  the  bill  pass  the  veto  of  the  President 
regardless  thereof?" 

Not  the  slightest  difficulty  existed  in  the  House;  Thad- 
deus  Stevens  had  too  complete  control  of  that  body  to  allow 
any  question  concerning  it  there.  The  bill,  therefore,  was 
promptly  passed  over  the  veto  of  the  President. 

But  the  situation  in  the  Senate  was  different.     At  that 


PRESIDENT  JOHXSON  151 

time  the  Sumner-Wade  radical  element  did  not  have  the 
necessary  two-thirds  majority,  and  the  bill  failed  to  pass 
over  the  veto  of  the  President.  The  war  between  the  ex 
ecutive  and  legislative  departments  of  the  Government  had 
fairly  commenced,  and  the  first  victory  had  been  won  by  the 
President. 

The  Civil  Rights  bill,  drawn  and  introduced  by  Judge 
Trumbull,  than  whom  there  was  no  greater  lawyer  in  the 
United  States  Senate,  in  January,  1866,  on  the  reassembling 
of  Congress,  wras  passed.  Then  began  the  real  struggle  on 
the  part  of  the  radicals  in  the  Senate,  headed  by  Sumner  and 
Wade,  to  muster  the  necessary  two-thirds  majority  to  pass 
a  bill  over  the  veto  of  the  President. 

Let  me  digress  here  to  say  a  word  in  reference  to  Charles 
Sumner.  For  ten  years  he  was  chairman  of  the  Foreign  Re 
lations  Committee  of  the  United  States  Senate,  and  no  man, 
by  education,  experience,  knowledge  of  world  politics,  and 
travel,  was  ever  more  fitted  to  occupy  that  high  position. 
He  was  one  of  the  most  cultivated  men  of  his  day,  a  radical, 
and  filled  one  of  the  most  important  places  in  the  history  of 
his  time.  When  he  entered  the  Senate,  the  South  domi 
nated  this  Government;  the  great  triumvirate,  Webster, 
Clay,  and  Calhoun,  had  just  passed.  The  day  he  entered, 
Clay  for  the  last  time,  feeble,  emaciated,  appeared  on  the 
Senate  floor.  Compromise  was  the  word,  and  the  Southern 
ers  so  dominated  that  it  was  considered  treason  to  mention 
the  slavery  question.  Charles  Sumner  was  an  abolitionist; 
he  was  not  afraid,  and  at  the  very  first  opportunity  he  took 
the  floor  and  denounced  the  institution  in  no  unmeasured 
terms.  Chase  and  Seward  were  present  that  day,  and 
quickly  followed  Sumner's  lead.  Seward,  however,  was  far 
more  conservative  than  either  Sumner  or  Chase. 

It  was  the  mission  of  Charles  Sumner  to  awake  the  public 


152     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

conscience  to  the  horrors  of  slavery.  He  performed  his 
duty  unfalteringly,  and  it  almost  cost  him  his  life.  Mr. 
Lincoln  was  the  only  man  living  who  ever  managed  Charles 
Sumner,  or  could  use  him  for  his  purpose.  Sumner's  end 
has  always  seemed  to  me  most  pitiful.  Removed  from  his 
high  position  as  chairman  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Commit 
tee  of  the  Senate,  followed  relentlessly  by  the  enmity  of 
President  Grant,  then  at  the  very  acme  of  his  fame;  drift 
ing  from  the  Republican  party,  his  own  State  repudiating 
him,  Charles  Sumner  died  of  a  broken  heart. 

But  to  return  to  the  struggle  between  the  President  and 
Congress.  Trumbull,  Sumner,  Wade,  and  the  leaders  were 
bound  in  one  way  or  another  to  get  the  necessary  two-thirds. 
The  vote  was  taken  in  the  Senate:  "Shall  the  Civil  Rights 
bill  pass  the  veto  of  the  President  to  the  contrary  notwith 
standing?  "  It  was  well  understood  that  the  vote  would  be 
very  close,  and  the  result  uncertain. 

The  excitement  was  intense.  The  galleries  were  crowded; 
members  of  the  House  were  on  the  Senate  floor.  The  result 
seemed  to  depend  entirely  on  the  vote  of  Senator  Morgan,  of 
New  York,  and  he  seemed  to  be  irresolute,  uncertain  in  his 
own  mind  which  way  he  would  vote.  The  call  of  the  roll 
proceeded.  When  his  name  was  reached  there  was  pro 
found  silence.  He  first  voted  nay,  and  then  immediately 
changed  to  yea.  A  wonderful  demonstration  burst  forth, 
as  it  was  then  known  that  the  bill  would  pass  over  the  veto 
of  the  President,  and  that  the  Republican  party  in  Congress 
at  last  had  complete  control.  Senator  Trumbull  made  a 
remarkable  speech  on  that  occasion,  and  I  was  never  prouder 
of  any  living  man. 

So  the  struggle  went  on  from  day  to  day  and  year  to  year, 
growing  all  the  time  more  intense.  I  have  always  been  dis 
posed  to  be  conservative;  I  was  then;  and  it  was  with  pro- 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  153 

found  regret  that  I  saw  the  feeling  between  the  President 
and  Congress  becoming  more  and  more  strained. 

I  disliked  to  follow  the  extreme  radical  element,  and  when 
the  row  was  at  its  height,  Judge  Orth,  a  colleague  in  the 
House  from  Indiana,  and  I  concluded  to  go  and  see  the 
President  and  advise  with  him,  in  an  attempt  to  smooth  over 
the  differences.  I  will  never  forget  that  interview.  It  was 
at  night.  He  received  us  politely  enough,  and  without 
mincing  any  words  he  gave  us  to  understand  that  we  were 
on  a  fool's  errand  and  that  he  would  not  yield.  We  went 
away,  and  naturally  joined  the  extreme  radicals  in  the 
House,  always  voting  with  them  afterwards. 

The  row  continued  in  the  Fortieth  Congress.  Bills  were 
passed,  promptly  vetoed,  and  the  bills  immediately  passed 
over  the  President's  veto.  Many  of  the  bills  were  not  only 
unwise  legislation  but  were  unconstitutional  as  well.  We 
passed  the  Tenure  of  Office  bill;  we  attempted  to  restrict  the 
President's  pardoning  power;  and  as  I  look  back  over  the 
history  of  the  period,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  did  not  have 
the  slightest  regard  for  the  Constitution.  Some  of  Presi 
dent  Johnson's  veto  messages  were  admirable.  He  had  the 
advice  and  assistance  of  one  of  the  ablest  lawyers  of  his  day, 
Jeremiah  Black. 

To  make  the  feeling  more  intense,  just  about  this  time 
Johnson  made  his  famous  "swing  around  the  circle,"  as  it 
was  termed.  His  speeches  published  in  the  opposition  press 
were  intemperate  and  extreme.  He  denounced  Congress. 
He  threatened  to  "kick  people  out  of  office,"  in  violation  of 
the  Tenure  of  Office  act.  He  was  undignified  in  his  actions 
and  language,  and  many  people  thought  he  was  intoxicated 
most  of  the  time,  although  I  do  not  believe  this. 

The  radicals  in  both  the  House  and  Senate  determined 
that  he  should  be  impeached  and  removed  from  office.  They 


154     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

had  the  votes  in  the  House  easily,  and  they  thought  they 
could  muster  the  necessary  number  in  the  Senate,  as  we  had 
been  passing  all  sorts  of  legislation  over  the  President's  veto. 
When  the  subject  was  up,  I  was  doubtful,  and  I  really  be 
lieve,  strong  Republican  that  I  was,  that  had  it  not  been  for 
Judge  Trumbull  I  would  have  voted  against  the  impeach 
ment  articles.  I  advised  with  the  Judge,  for  whom  I  had 
profound  respect.  I  visited  him  at  his  house.  I  explained 
to  him  my  doubts,  and  I  recall  very  clearly  the  expression 
he  used  in  reply.  He  said:  " Johnson  is  an  obstruction  to 
the  Government  and  should  be  removed."  Judge  Trumbull 
himself  changed  afterwards,  much  to  the  astonishment  of 
every  one,  and  denounced  the  impeachment  proceeding  as 
unworthy  of  a  justice  of  the  peace  court. 

It  seems  to  me  difficult  to  realize  that  it  was  as  far  back 
as  March  2,  1868,  that  I  addressed  the  House  in  favor  of 
the  impeachment  articles.  I  think  I  made  a  pretty  good 
speech  on  that  occasion  and  supported  my  position  very  well. 
I  took  rather  an  extreme  view  in  favor  of  the  predominance 
of  the  legislative  department  of  the  Government,  contend 
ing  that  the  executive  and  judiciary  departments  of  the 
Government,  while  they  are  finally  responsible  to  the  people, 
are  directly  accountable  to  the  legislative  department. 

The  first  and  principal  article  in  the  impeachment  pro 
posed  by  the  House  was  the  President's  issuance  of  an  order 
removing  Edwin  M.  Stanton  as  Secretary  of  War,  he  hav 
ing  been  duly  appointed  and  commissioned  by  and  with  the 
advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  and  the  Senate  having  been 
in  session  at  the  time  of  his  removal. 

I  contended  then,  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  that  such  a 
removal  was  a  violation  of  the  Constitution  and  could  not 
be  excused  on  any  pretext  whatever,  in  addition  to  being  a 
direct  violation  of  the  Tenure  of  Office  act. 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  155 

I  do  not  intend  to  go  into  the  details  of  the  various  articles 
proposed  by  the  House;  suffice  it  to  say  that  they  were 
mainly  based  on  the  attempted  removal  of  Mr.  Stanton,  and 
the  appointment  of  Mr.  Thomas  as  Secretary  of  War. 

I  was  very  serious  in  concluding  my  speech.  My  words 
were: 

"Mn.  CHAIRMAN:  The  administration  of  Mr.  Johnson  since  he  became 
President  of  the  United  States  has  been  characterized  by  an  utter  dis 
regard  of  the  laws  and  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  And,  sir, 
I  am  of  the  opinion  that  there  should  be  another  article  adopted  by 
this  House,  and  sent  to  the  Senate,  upon  which  he  should  be  tried, 
the  substance  of  which  should  be  that  Andrew  Johnson,  President  of  the 
United  States,  is  guilty  of  high  crimes  in  office,  in  that  he  violated 
the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  by  using  his  influence, 
patronage  and  power  of  said  office  to  hinder,  delay  and  prevent  a 
restoration  of  the  States  lately  in  rebellion  against  the  Government,  to 
their  proper  practical  relations  to  the  Union.  Congress  provided  by 
law  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  rebel  States.  The  President,  from 
whatever  motives  it  matters  not,  stands  in  his  Executive  Office,  and  by 
all  his  influence  and  power  opposes  restoration  according  to  law.  As 
an  Executive  Officer,  he  has  no  such  right,  and  his  opposition  to  the 
laws  of  Congress  on  the  subject  of  reconstruction  has  cost  this  Nation 
thousands  of  loyal  men  who  have  been  murdered  in  the  South  on  account 
of  their  devotion  to  the  Flag,  and  millions  of  money  which  is  to  be 
added  to  the  enormous  public  debt  to  be  cast  upon  the  necks  of  the 
people.  Shall  the  Nation  endure  it  longer?  Shall  we  struggle  on  and 
on  until  the  welcome  day  comes  when  his  term  shall  expire?  The 
people  say  'No';  men  struggling  in  business  say  'No';  men  longing  for 
peace  and  harmony  in  the  land  say  'No';  the  loyal  men  of  the  South, 
who  have  been  abused  and  hunted  by  wicked  rebels,  say  'No' ;  and  I  trust 
that  the  answer  of  all  these  may  be  the  answer  of  this  House  to-day, 
and  the  answer  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  within  a  reasonable 
time  after  these  articles  shall  be  sent  them." 

Needless  for  me  to  say,  that  as  the  subject  continued  feel 
ing  remained  at  a  high  pitch  in  the  House.  It  was  debated 
from  day  to  day.  Stevens  was  urging  the  impeachment 


156     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

with  all  the  force  at  his  command;  some  were  doubtful  and 
holding  back,  as  I  was ;  some  changed  —  for  instance,  James 
G.  Elaine,  who  was  taunted  by  Stevens  and  sneered  at  for 
his  change  of  front. 

Under  the  law  then  existing  the  President  of  the  Senate 
succeeded  a  Vice-President  who  became,  by  the  death  or  re 
moval  of  the  President,  President  of  the  United  States. 
The  radicals  in  complete  control  —  and  I  have  no  doubt  that 
Stevens  had  a  hand  in  it  —  elected  the  most  radical  of  their 
number  as  President  of  the  Senate  —  Ben  Wade,  of  Ohio. 
Johnson  removed,  Wade  would  have  been  President,  and  the 
extreme  radicals  would  have  been  in  supreme  control  of  the 
legislative  and  executive  departments  of  the  Government. 

This  condition  is  what  made  Mr.  Blaine  hesitate.  He  told 
me  on  one  occasion:  "Johnson  in  the  White  House  is  bad 
enough,  but  we  know  what  we  have;  Lord  knows  what  we 
would  get  with  old  Ben  Wade  there.  I  do  not  know  but  I 
would  rather  trust  Johnson  than  Wade."  But  in  the  end 
Blaine  supported  the  impeachment  articles,  just  as  I  did, 
and  as  Senator  Allison  and  other  somewhat  conservative 
members  did,  all  feeling  at  the  same  time  not  a  little  doubt 
ful  of  our  course. 

Stevens,  Logan,  Boutwell,  Williams,  and  Wilson  were  ap 
pointed  managers  on  the  part  of  the  House,  and  solemnly 
and  officially  notified  the  Senate  of  the  action  of  the  House 
in  impeaching  the  President  of  the  United  States.  The 
Senate  proceeded  without  long  delay  to  resolve  itself  as  a 
High  Court  of  Impeachment,  for  the  purpose  of  trying  the 
President  of  the  United  States  for  high  crimes  and  misde 
meanors.  The  most  eminent  counsel  of  the  Nation  were 
engaged.  Mr.  Evarts  was  President  Johnson's  principal 
counsel.  He  was  ably  assisted  by  lawyers  of  scarcely  less 
renown. 


PRESIDENT  JOHNSON  157 

The  trial  dragged  along  from  day  to  day.  Part  of  the 
time  the  Senate  considered  the  matter  in  executive  session. 
The  corridors  were  crowded;  and  I  remember  with  what 
astonishment  we  heard  that  Judge  Trumbull  had  taken  the 
floor  denouncing  the  proceeding  as  unworthy  of  a  justice  of 
the  peace  court.  The  Illinois  delegation  held  a  meeting,  and 
Logan,  Farnsworth,  and  Washburne  urged  that  we  unite  in 
a  letter  to  Judge  Trumbull,  with  a  view  to  influencing  his 
vote  for  conviction,  or  of  inducing  him  to  withhold  his  vote 
if  he  could  not  vote  for  conviction.  A  number  of  our  dele 
gation  opposed  it,  and  the  letter  was  not  sent. 

I  do  not  think  that  it  would  have  made  the  slightest  effect 
on  Judge  Trumbull  had  we  sent  it.  All  sorts  of  coercing 
methods  were  used  to  influence  wavering  Senators.  Old  Bob 
Schenck  was  the  chairman  of  this  movement,  and  he  sent 
telegrams  broadcast  all  over  the  United  States  to  the  effect 
that  there  was  great  danger  to  the  peace  of  the  country  and 
the  Republican  cause  if  impeachment  failed,  and  asking  the 
recipients  to  send  to  their  Senators  public  opinion  by  reso 
lutions  and  delegations.  And  responses  came  from  all  over 
the  North,  urging  and  demanding  the  impeachment  of  the 
President. 

It  is  difficult  now  to  realize  the  intense  excitement  of  that 
period.  General  Grant  was  there,  tacitly  acknowledged  as 
the  next  nominee  of  the  Republican  party  for  the  Presi 
dency.  He  took  no  active  part,  but  it  was  pretty  well 
understood,  from  the  position  of  his  friends  such  as  Logan 
and  Washburne,  that  the  impeachment  had  his  sympathy; 
and  in  the  Senate  Conkling  was  especially  vindictive. 
Grimes,  Fessenden,  and  Trumbull  led  the  fight  for  acquittal. 
Many  were  noncommittal ;  but  in  the  end  the  struggle  turned 
on  the  one  doubtful  Senator,  Edmund  G.  Ross  of  Kansas. 

It  was  determined  to  vote  on  the  tenth  article  first,  as  that 


158     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

article  was  the  strongest  one  and  more  votes  could  be  mus 
tered  for  it  than  any  other.  It  was  well  understood  that  the 
vote  on  that  article  would  settle  the  matter. 

More  than  forty-three  years  have  passed  into  history 
since  that  memorable  day  when  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  was  sitting  as  a  Court  of  Impeachment  for  the  pur 
pose  of  trying  the  President  of  the  United  States  for  high 
crimes  and  misdemeanors.  The  occasion  is  unforgettable. 
As  I  look  back  now,  I  see  arising  before  me  the  forms  and 
features  of  the  great  men  who  were  sitting  in  that  high 
court:  I  see  presiding  Chief  Justice  Chase;  I  see  Sumner, 
cold  and  dignified;  Wade,  Trumbull,  Hendricks,  Conkling, 
Yates;  I  see  Logan  as  one  of  the  managers  on  the  part  of 
the  House;  I  see  old  Thad  Stevens,  weak  and  wasted  from 
illness,  being  carried  in  —  all  long  since  have  passed  to  the 
beyond,  the  accused  President,  the  members  of  the  high 
court,  the  counsel.  Of  all  the  eminent  men  who  were  pres 
ent  on  that  day,  aside  from  the  Hon.  J.  B.  Henderson,  I  do 
not  know  of  a  single  one  now  living. 

As  the  roll  was  called,  there  was  such  a  solemn  hush  as 
only  comes  when  man  stands  in  the  presence  of  Deity. 
Finally,  when  the  name  of  Ross  was  reached  and  he  voted 
"No";  when  it  was  understood  that  his  vote  meant  acquittal, 
the  friends  of  the  President  in  the  galleries  thundered  forth 
in  applause. 

And  thus  ended  for  the  first,  and  I  hope  the  last,  time  the 
trial  of  a  President  of  the  United  States  before  the  Senate, 
sitting  as  a  Court  of  Impeachment  for  high  crimes  and  mis 
demeanors. 


CHAPTER  X 

SPEAKER   OF   THE   LEGISLATURE,    AND   GOVERNOR 
1871    TO    1883 

AFTER  my  six  years'  service  in  the  Lower  House  of 
Congress,  I  returned  home,  not  expecting  ever  again 
to  take  office,  or  engage  in  politics.  There  was  a  contest 
going  on  in  the  State  over  the  location  of  the  State  Capitol. 
The  State  had  committed  itself  to  the  erection  of  a  new 
Capitol  building,  and  had  really  made  considerable  progress 
on  its  construction. 

In  the  meantime,  the  question  of  changing  the  location 
from  Springfield  to  some  other  city  was  agitated.  Peoria 
made  a  very  strong  effort  for  the  removal  to  that  city. 
The  work  on  the  new  building,  as  an  immediate  result,  was 
stopped.  The  Legislature  had  adjourned,  and  another  elec 
tion  of  members  was  to  occur.  This  condition  of  local  af 
fairs  existed  when  I  returned  home  after  my  service  was 
finished  in  Washington. 

The  friends  in  my  home  county,  in  which  the  State  Capitol 
is  located,  waited  on  me  and  expressed  a  desire  that  I  should 
allow  my  name  to  be  used  as  a  candidate  for  the  Legislature. 
I  made  known  my  resolve  not  to  enter  politics  again;  but 
they  based  the  proposal  upon  a  ground  that  made  it  ex 
tremely  difficult  and  embarrassing  not  to  accede,  to-wit: 
they  had  been  with  me  for  anything  I  had  ever  wanted,  and 
now  they  wanted  me  to  reciprocate,  and  do  as  they  desired. 
I  did  not  feel  that  I  could  disregard  their  wishes,  and  so 
yielded  to  their  demand;  it  was  nothing  less. 

159 


160     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

They  then  went  to  the  Hon.  Milton  Hay,  who  was  a  great 
lawyer,  and  as  good  a  man  as  I  ever  knew,  and  made  the 
same  demand  upon  him.  He  was  under  no  special  obliga 
tion  to  yield  to  their  wishes,  for  he  had  never  asked  for  office 
at  the  hands  of  the  people.  He  declined ;  but  they  also  de 
clined  to  take  "  No  "  for  an  answer.  The  result  was  that 
both  Hay  and  I  became  candidates,  were  both  elected,  and 
the  contest  over  the  removal  of  the  State  Capitol  was  not 
renewed. 

I  was  chosen  Speaker.  Mr.  Hay  was  the  foremost  lawyer 
of  the  Legislature.  One  million  dollars  was  reported  from 
the  proper  committee  of  the  House,  and  passed  without 
opposition,  and  the  work  on  the  Capitol  was  once  more 
taken  up. 

Finding  myself  again  in  politics,  I  determined  to  become 
a  candidate  for  Governor.  To  be  successful,  it  seemed  to  be 
important  that  I  should  go  back  into  the  Legislature,  which 
I  did.  After  my  reelection  I  was  supported  by  the  Re 
publican  party  for  Speaker  for  my  second  term. 

However,  the  House  of  Representatives  was  in  control  of 
the  opposition,  composed  of  Democrats  and  Independents, 
the  latter  being  more  generally  wrong  than  the  Democrats, — 
and  much  less  reliable.  The  combination  organized  the 
House,  the  Hon.  Elijah  Haines  being  elected  Speaker,  and 
the  Republicans  casting  their  united  vote  for  me.  This 
Legislature  has  ever  since  been  known  as  the  "  Haines  Legis 
lature,"  the  most  notorious  Legislature  ever  known  in  the 
State.  Haines  was  a  man  of  ability  —  especially,  to  stir  up 
strife  and  produce  confusion. 

The  Legislature  convened  in  the  Winter  of  1875.  I  was 
nominated  for  Governor  early  in  1876,  elected  in  November 
of  the  same  year,  and  sworn  in  January,  1877. 

On  reexamining  my  inaugural  address,  I  find  much  stated 


SPEAKER  AND  GOVERNOR      161 

there  that  is  at  the  present  time,  and  must  long  remain,  of 
historic  interest  to  the  people  of  Illinois;  but  since  its  length 
precludes  reproduction  here,  I  can  merely  touch  upon  cer 
tain  points,  more  fully  covered  in  the  address,  that  offer 
many  curious  aspects  and  contrasts  in  the  light  of  latter-day 
conditions. 

To  begin  with,  the  Legislature  of  that  year  was  the  first 
to  meet  in  the  new  Capitol.  The  effects  of  the  financial 
panic  of  1873  were  still  felt,  but  it  was  pointed  out  that 
the  State's  resources  were  in  no  way  impaired;  that  on 
the  contrary  —  circumstances  to  be  proud  of  —  the  volume 
of  private  indebtedness  had  been  materially  reduced,  while 
the  productive  wealth  of  farms,  buildings,  factories,  mines, 
and  railroads  had  never  before  been  so  great. 

Of  matters  educational,  there  had  been  enrolled  as  pupils 
the  preceding  year  (1876)  687,446  persons,  and  appropria 
tions  for  public-school  purposes  for  the  corresponding  period 
had  amounted  to  $8,268,539.58. 

Among  other  matters  of  local  interest  adverted  to,  which 
to-day  are  as  alive  and  momentous  as  they  were  then,  were 
the  subjects  of  navigation  —  particularly  on  the  Illinois 
River  and  the  canal  —  and  the  supervision  of  the  railroads 
by  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission.  At  that 
time  there  were  7,285  miles  of  railroad  in  the  State  —  a 
greater  mileage  than  any  other  State  in  the  Union  could 
boast  of. 

Only  eleven  years  had  elapsed  since  the  close  of  the  Civil 
War,  and  its  after-effects  still  worked  like  an  obnoxious  fer 
ment  in  the  State's  political  conditions;  closely  allied  with 
this  was  the  influence  of  the  Hayes-Tilden  contest,  all  of 
which  commanded  a  large  proportion  of  my  speech. 

One  extract  I  wish  to  quote  in  full,  since  it  was  a  prelude 
to  events  which  followed  so  soon  afterwards : 


162     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"I  desire  to  add  one  suggestion  in  reference  to  the  affairs  of  our  own 
State,  by  calling  your  attention  to  the  Militia  Law.  I  believe  a  more 
perfect  law  should  be  enacted,  which  will  secure  a  more  thorough  organiza 
tion  of  the  State  militia. 

"The  spirit  of  our  institutions  and  the  temper  of  our  people  are  hos 
tile  to  a  standing  army,,  and  I  am  opposed  to  any  policy,  State  or 
National,  looking  to  governing  the  people  by  bayonet;  yet  in  the  most 
highly  civilized  communities  a  trained  militia,  recruited  from  the  in 
telligent  and  industrious  classes,  is  an  almost  indispensable  auxiliary  to 
the  civil  power  in  the  interests  of  peace  and  good  order." 

Little  did  I  dream  that  within  six  months  of  my  inaugu 
ration  the  timeliness  and  force  of  the  suggestions,  and  any 
recommendations  contained  in  the  closing  paragraphs  above, 
would  find  convincing  illustrations  in  conditions  throughout 
the  Nation,  and  more  especially  in  Illinois. 

In  July,  1877,  the  famous  strike  of  the  railway  employees 
came  on.  It  was  exceptionally  strong  in  the  cities  of  Illinois 
-  Chicago,  Decatur,  Springfield,  Galesburg,  East  St. 
Louis,  and  every  other  city  of  considerable  size.  The  State 
was  ill  prepared  for  such  a  crisis.  The  strike  ran  along  for 
several  days  with  the  State  unready  to  bring  the  matter  to 
a  close.  Having  been  in  office  but  a  few  months,  I  had  not 
yet  secured  any  arms  or  other  military  equipment  with  which 
to  combat  organized  violations  of  the  law.  The  Illinois  Na 
tional  Guard  was  inchoate  —  in  fact,  scarcely  organized  at 
all,  except  in  companies  voluntarily  formed,  which  were  al 
most  entirely  without  military  equipment.  Finally,  however, 
I  determined  to  order  the  National  Guard  to  East  St.  Louis. 

I  telegraphed  to  Chicago  for  a  locomotive  and  car  to  take 
me  to  East  St.  Louis  about  two  o'clock  on  a  specified  night. 
After  ordering  the  troops  from  different  parts  of  the  State 
to  assemble  at  East  St.  Louis  on  a  given  day,  I  went  to  East 
St.  Louis  myself,  three  or  four  gentlemen  accompanying  me. 
There  I  found  several  thousand  men  sitting  about  on  the 


SPEAKER  AND  GOVERNOR      163 

curbs  of  the  sidewalks,  apparently  perfectly  quiet  and  inof 
fensive,  if  not  unconcerned,  and  I  concluded  that  there  was 
no  reason  why  trains  should  not  move. 

However,  I  first  consulted  with  several  railroad  men,  ex 
pressing  the  opinion  that  the  strikers  and  their  sympathizers 
did  not  seem  desirous  of  disturbing  anybody,  and  insisted 
that  they  proceed  to  move  out  their  trains. 

The  superintendent  of  one  of  the  roads  finally  promised 
to  have  a  train  made  up,  and  undertake  to  move  it. 

"  All  right,"  said  I.  "  Fire  up,  and  I  will  come  around 
about  the  time  you  are  ready  to  move."  He  did  as  he  had 
promised,  and  I  went  around  with  the  friends  who  were  ac 
companying  me. 

But  about  the  time  the  train  was  ready  to  move,  these  mild- 
mannered  laboring  men,  to  the  number  of  five  or  six  hundred, 
gently  closed  in  upon  the  train,  and  put  out  the  fire  in  the 
engine  so  that  it  could  not  be  moved. 

Thereupon,  I  stood  upon  the  sidewalk  and  addressed  this 
crowd  of  five  or  six  hundred  fire-extinguishers.  I  told  them 
that  I  had  come  there  to  move  the  trains,  and  while  I  did  not 
want  to  hurt  any  one,  that  the  trains  wrould  be  started,  if 
everybody  who  interfered  first  had  to  be  disabled.  They 
gradually  skulked  away,  and  I  ordered  the  fire  built  up 
again,  asserting  that  I  would  be  back  in  half  an  hour  to  see 
the  trains  move.  But  the  men  notified  the  engineer  that  they 
would  kill  any  man  who  undertook  to  take  the  train  out,  and 
in  the  face  of  that  threat  no  one  could  be  prevailed  upon  to 
man  engines  or  train. 

Finally,  however,  one  man  agreed,  if  I  would  accompany 
him  as  far  as  Decatur,  about  a  hundred  miles,  to  endeavor  to 
go  out  with  the  train.  I  told  him  I  could  not  do  that,  but  I 
would  stand  by  his  side  while  he  was  going  through  the 
streets  of  East  St.  Louis.  But  he  would  not  agree  to  this, 


164     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

so  that  my  efforts  to  move  a  single  train  had  met  with  com 
plete  failure.  The  result  was  that  I  was  driven  to  the 
expediency  of  calling  upon  the  military  arm  of  the  State  au 
thority. 

That  evening  the  troops  began  to  arrive.  They  were  sta 
tioned  at  the  strategic  points  of  the  city  during  the  night, 
and  the  next  morning  the  trains  moved  out  without  a  single 
accident  or  disturbance. 

In  Chicago,  the  National  Guard  did  not  seem  to  accom 
plish  anything.  The  people  there  did  not  take  them  seri 
ously,  and  the  result  was  that  I  called  upon  the  National 
Government  to  send  to  that  city  a  few  companies  of  regular 
troops.  I  think  they  came  from  Omaha.  When  they  ar 
rived,  and  marched  up  the  streets  —  that  was  the  end  of  the 
strike  in  that  city. 

So  I  managed  to  get  through  the  trouble  without  injury 
to  a  single  person,  or  the  loss  of  any  property  except  that 
caused  by  the  delay  in  the  transaction  of  business.  These 
results  were  quite  different  from  those  in  some  other  parts 
of  the  country.  My  chief  private  secretary  was  in  the  East 
somewhere,  and  could  not  return  to  me  until  the  trouble  was 
all  over. 

As  Governor  of  a  State  in  a  time  when  actual  war  was 
not  flagrant,  I  could  only  watch,  as  might  any  other  Ameri 
can  citizen,  the  exciting  proceedings  at  the  National  Capital, 
and  hope  that  our  country  might  issue  from  the  political 
contest  without  a  weakening  of  our  institutions  or  loss  of 
prestige.  At  the  same  time,  I  felt  that  I  might  appropri 
ately  express  my  approval  of  the  attitude  of  the  National 
administration,  which  I  did  in  a  letter  to  the  President. 

When  I  was  Governor  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  I  had  the 
good  fortune  of  becoming  intimately  acquainted  with  one  of 


SHELBY   M.  CULLOM 

While  Governor  of  Illinois 


SPEAKER  AND  GOVERNOR      165 

the  great  soldiers  of  the  recent  Civil  War,  who  was,  in  my 
judgment,  the  greatest  cavalry  leader  of  modern  times,— 
General  Phil  Sheridan.  He  was  Commander  of  the  De 
partment  of  the  Lakes  during  my  administration,  and  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  meeting  him  on  numerous  occasions. 

At  an  immense  reunion  of  volunteer  soldiers  from  North 
ern  Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin,  which  was  held  in 
Aurora,  I,  as  Governor  of  the  State,  was  invited  to  make 
the  first  address.  General  Sheridan  was  invited  to  be  present 
and  take  part  in  this  celebration,  and  he  came  down  from 
Chicago,  accompanied  by  his  wife.  I  met  them  at  Aurora. 
We  rode  in  the  same  carriage,  at  the  rear  of  the  procession, 
to  the  fair  grounds,  a  mile  or  so  distant  from  the  city.  The 
day  was  hot,  and  as  we  entered  a  dense  grove,  on  the  road, 
the  soldiers  halted  for  a  breathing  spell,  and  while  at  rest 
many  of  them  went  to  a  well  near  by  for  water.  It  was 
observed  by  some  of  the  soldiers  that  General  Sheridan  re 
mained  in  the  carriage,  and  they  immediately  surrounded 
us.  He  greeted  all  cordially  and  good-naturedly,  being  very 
fond  of  soldiers  who  had  fought  on  the  Union  side  of  the 
great  struggle  between  the  North  and  South.  What  imme 
diately  followed  pleased  Mrs.  Sheridan  and  those  who  were 
near,  and  amused  Sheridan  himself.  A  big  Irish  soldier- 
boy  got  hold  of  Sheridan's  hand  and  pulled  him  out  of  the 
carriage.  Being  of  small  stature,  General  Sheridan  was  at 
the  mercy  of  the  stalwart  Irishman,  who  dealt  with  him  in  a 
very  rough  way,  slapping  him  on  the  back  with  great  force, 
and  with  as  much  earnestness  exclaiming:  "  Boys,  this  is 
the  damnedest,  bravest  little  Mick  in  America!  " 

As  is  well  known  now,  the  operations  of  General  Sheridan 
in  the  Shenandoah  Valley  and  the  region  of  Richmond  called 
forth  the  plaudits  of  the  Nation  and  the  commendation  of  his 
superiors.  His  victories  had  much  to  do  with  bringing  the 


166     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Civil  War  to  a  close.  He  was  conscious  of  the  power  and 
value  of  the  cavalry  arm  of  the  army.  In  discussing  his 
great  achievements  he  made  the  remarkable  statement  that 
with  a  force  of  five  or  ten  thousand  cavalrymen,  well  organ 
ized,  he  could  run  over  an  army  of  almost  any  size.  Whether 
this  be  true  or  not,  it  remains  that  General  Grant  had  implicit 
confidence  in  Sheridan's  ability  to  command  the  cavalry 
forces  in  a  manner  superior  to  any  other  officer  in  the  Union 
Army. 

It  was  on  the  suggestion  of  Grant  that  Sheridan  was 
brought  from  the  West  to  take  command  of  the  cavalry. 
After  coming  East,  he  was  presented  to  President  Lincoln. 
The  President  scrutinized  him  closely.  He  did  not  appear 
to  be  the  officer  recommended  to  him  by  Grant  as  the  one  man 
who  could  bring  the  cavalry  forces  to  that  standard  which 
was  so  much  desired. 

The  first  time  Lincoln  met  Grant  after  Sheridan  called 
on  him  he  expressed  his  doubt.  "The  officer  you  brought 
from  the  West  seems  rather  a  little  fellow  to  handle  your 
cavalry,"  said  he. 

Grant,  however,  unshaken  in  the  belief  that  he  at  last  had 
an  officer  under  him  whom  he  could  trust  in  charge  of  all 
the  armies  of  the  Union  if  necessary,  replied:  '  You  will 
find  him  big  enough  for  the  purpose  before  we  get  through 
with  him." 

Sheridan  was  not  only  popular  with  his  superior  officers 
and  men  under  him,  but  with  the  people  generally.  He  was 
held  in  the  highest  esteem  by  the  people  of  my  State.  After 
his  promotion  to  the  rank  of  Lieutenant-General,  the  citi 
zens  of  Chicago  presented  him  with  a  house  in  Washington, 
as  a  mark  of  their  friendship  and  devotion. 

While  Governor  I  rendered  a  decision  in  an  extradition 


SPEAKER  AND  GOVERNOR      167 

case,  which  formed  a  precedent,  and  which  is  referred  to  by 
writers  on  extradition. 

Moore  comments  on  it  as  follows: 

"In  December,,  1878,  an  interesting  decision  was  made  by  Governor 
Cullom,  of  Illinois,  in  the  case  of  two  persons  named  Gaffigan  and 
Merrick,  whose  surrender  was  demanded  by  the  Governor  of  Pennsyl 
vania  on  a  charge  of  murder  committed  in  that  State  in  January,  1865. 
Accompanying  the  requisition  was  an  indictment  found  against  them 
in  Pennsylvania  in  March,  1865,  for  the  crime  for  which  their  rendition 
was  demanded.  It  was  alleged  in  their  behalf  that  soon  after  the  mur 
der  was  committed,  and  before  the  indictment  was  found,  they  left  their 
place  of  residence  in  Pennsylvania  and  went  to  Illinois,  where  they  had 
resided  continuously  in  an  open  manner,  bearing  their  own  names,  trans 
acting  daily  business,  and  holding  responsible  public  positions.  In  1870  or 
1871  Gaffigan  was  joined  by  his  father,  who  left  their  former  place  of  resi 
dence  in  Pennsylvania  with  the  avowed  purpose  of  joining  his  son  in  Illi 
nois.  The  residence  of  the  latter  in  Illinois  was  also  known  to  other  per 
sons  in  the  particular  locality  in  Pennsylvania,  among  whom  were  a  consta 
ble  and  a  witness  whose  name  was  endorsed  on  the  indictment.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  prosecuting  attorney  in  Pennsylvania  denied  that  there 
had  been  any  laches  in  the  matter,  and  declared  that  he  had  acted  upon 
the  first  knowledge  that  he  had  acquired  in  respect  to  the  whereabouts 
of  the  persons  charged.  Governor  Cullom  held  that  while  it  might  be 
inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  accused  left  the  State  of  Pennsylvania 
shortly  after  the  date  of  the  murder  that  they  were  fugitives  from  jus 
tice,  yet  this  character  did  not  always  adhere  to  them;  and  that  their 
long  residence  in  Illinois,  which  was  so  entirely  unconcealed  and  well 
known,  that  the  officers  of  justice  in  Pennsylvania  could  have  been 
ignorant  of  it  only  because  they  made  no  effort  to  find  it  out,  had  purged 
them  of  the  character  of  fugitives  from  justice.  It  may  be  argued  that 
this  decision  rests  on  moral  rather  than  upon  strictly  legal  grounds.  It 
is  generally  held  that  there  is  no  limitation  as  to  the  time  in  the  recovery 
of  fugitives  from  justice  other  than  such  as  may  be  established  by 
statutes  of  limitations  of  the  Governments  concerned,  and  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  suggested  in  the  case  under  consideration  that  any 
such  limitation  had  been  established  either  by  the  laws  of  Pennsylvania 


168     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

or  of  Illinois.  The  decision  of  Governor  Cullom  may  also  be  thought 
to  involve  the  theory  that  the  authorities  of  the  demanding  State  may  be 
called  upon  to  show  that  they  have  used  due  diligence  in  pursuing  the 
fugitives  and  in  seeking  their  surrender." 

The  decision  created  much  comment  at  the  time,  some  ad 
verse,  suggesting  that  it  amounted  to  the  exercise  of  the 
pardoning  power  by  a  Governor  of  one  State  for  a  crime 
committed  in  another. 

My  administration  as  Governor  of  Illinois  was  a  very 
quiet,  uneventful  one.  I  endeavored  to  give  the  State  strictly 
a  business  administration,  and  I  believe  I  succeeded.  I  ap 
pointed  the  very  best  men  that  I  could  find  to  State  offices.  I 
did  not  interfere  with  the  conduct  of  the  various  departments 
and  institutions,  except  to  exercise  a  general  supervision  over 
them.  I  held  my  appointees  strictly  accountable  for  the  con 
duct  of  the  affairs  of  their  respective  offices,  and  did  not  at 
tempt  to  dictate  to  them  the  appointment  of  their  subordi 
nates. 

During  the  six  years  I  served  as  Governor  there  was  not 
a  single  scandal  connected  with  the  executive  department  of 
Illinois.  I  never  had  the  slightest  trouble  with  the  Legisla 
ture.  I  never  interfered  in  the  organization  of  the  Senate 
or  House.  I  believed  then,  and  I  believe  now,  in  the  inde 
pendence  of  the  three  coordinate  branches  of  the  Govern 
ment.  I  no  more  thought  of  influencing  the  Legislature 
than  I  would  have  thought  of  attempting  to  influence  the 
Judiciary.  My  recommendations  were  made  in  official  mes 
sages,  as  the  Constitution  prescribes,  and  generally,  I  might 
say,  the  Legislature  carried  out  my  recommendations.  The 
administration  was  an  economical  one,  and  it  was  during  this 
period  that  the  entire  State  debt  was  paid. 


CHAPTER  XI 

GRANT 

MY  acquaintance  with  General  Grant  began  when  he 
visited  Springfield  the  first  time  immediately  after 
the  beginning  of  the  Civil  War.  He  came  to  Springfield 
with  a  company  of  soldiers  raised  in  Galena.  General  John 
A.  Rawlins,  afterwards  Secretary  of  War  under  President 
Grant,  one  of  the  best  men  whom  I  ever  knew,  and  especially 
my  friend,  was  with  this  company.  General  Grant  offered 
his  services  to  Governor  Yates  in  any  capacity,  and  the  Gov 
ernor  requested  him  to  aid  General  Mather,  then  our  Adju 
tant-General.  General  Grant,  having  been  a  West  Point 
graduate,  and  having  served  as  a  captain  in  the  regular 
army,  rendered  the  Adjutant-General  very  material  service. 
On  the  morning  I  saw  him  in  the  Adjutant-General's  office 
at  Springfield,  nobody  ever  dreamed  that  this  quiet,  unas 
suming  subordinate  would,  in  less  than  four  years,  become 
one  of  the  greatest  generals  in  all  the  world's  history.  At 
the  outbreak  of  the  war  he  resided  at  Galena,  where  he  was 
in  business. 

He  was  sent  by  Governor  Yates  to  muster  in  the  various 
regiments,  and  continued  in  that  work  until  made  Colonel 
of  the  Twenty-first  Illinois  Regiment.  This  regiment  had 
been  raised  and  organized  by  another  man,  whose  habits 
were  not  regular,  and  under  whose  command  the  regiment 
had  become  demoralized.  General  Grant  took  the  Twenty- 
first  Illinois  on  foot  from  Springfield  into  Missouri,  and  be 
fore  he  had  travelled  very  far  with  it,  the  men  quickly  learned 

169 


170     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

that  he  was  a  real  commanding  officer,  a  strict  disciplinarian, 
and  that  orders  were  issued  to  be  obeyed.  The  regiment 
became  one  of  the  best  in  the  service. 

General  Grant  was  soon  made  a  Brigadier-General,  the 
first  to  be  commissioned  from  Illinois,  and  was  sent  to  com 
mand  at  Cairo. 

I  became  pretty  well  acquainted  with  him  at  Springfield, 
and  subsequently  I  visited  Cairo,  and  found  there  General 
Grant,  Governor  Oglesby,  and  other  Illinoisians  in  command 
of  regiments. 

General  Grant's  career  as  a  soldier  is  too  well  known  by 
the  world  to  be  repeated  by  me  here.  The  history  of  that 
career  is  the  history  of  the  Civil  War.  He  was  formally 
received  by  the  people  of  Springfield  on  two  occasions :  once 
while  he  was  still  in  command  in  the  army;  and  again  in 
1880,  after  his  trip  around  the  world,  he  was  my  guest  at 
the  Executive  Mansion  in  Springfield.  He  was  then  ac 
companied  by  Mrs.  Grant,  and  by  E.  B.  Washburne,  who 
had  been  one  of  his  closest  personal  friends  during  his  ad 
ministration. 

The  time  was  approaching  for  the  National  Convention  at 
Chicago,  and  General  Grant's  friends  had  prevailed  upon 
him  to  permit  the  use  of  his  name  as  a  candidate  for  a  third 
term.  Washburne  had  become  considerably  flattered  by  the 
demonstration  that  was  made  over  him  on  the  road  from 
Galena  to  Springfield,  and  I  believe  he  had  an  idea  that  he 
might  be  the  nominee  instead  of  General  Grant,  and  hence 
for  some  reason  or  other  he  did  not  want  to  identify  himself 
with  General  Grant  at  all.  When  the  time  came  to  go  to 
the  reception  at  the  State  House,  Washburne  could  not  be 
found.  It  seemed  that  he  had  hid  in  his  bedroom  until  the 
party  left  the  Executive  Mansion  for  the  State  House,  and 
then  went  by  himself  to  the  State  House,  and  secreted  him- 


GRANT  171 

self  in  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  State,  where  he  surrepti 
tiously  watched  proceedings  from  behind  the  sheltering  folds 
of  a  curtain. 

His  conduct  in  the  evening  was  still  more  remarkable.  I 
had  arranged  a  reception  to  General  and  Mrs.  Grant  and 
Mr.  Washburne  at  the  Executive  Mansion  that  same  evening, 
but  Mr.  Washburne  gave  some  excuse  which  he  claimed  ne 
cessitated  his  presence  in  the  East,  and  departed  —  apparently 
with  the  conviction  that  he  might  secure  the  Presidential  nomi 
nation  himself,  and  feeling  that  his  presence  in  company 
with  General  Grant  —  an  avowed  candidate  —  created  an 
embarrassing  situation  that  he  could  not  endure.  I  know 
that  General  Grant  was  deeply  grieved  at  his  conduct.  The 
General's  friends  were  so  outraged  that  they  determined 
Washburne  should  have  no  place  upon  the  ticket  at  all. 

General  Grant  was  not  a  candidate  for  reelection  at  the 
end  of  his  second  term ;  I  am  not  at  all  sure  whether  he  would 
not  have  been  glad  to  be  reflected  for  a  third  term  —  at 
least,  he  would  have  accepted  the  nomination  had  it  been 
tendered  to  him.  But  the  third-term  proposition,  at  that 
time,  received  a  severe  blow  when,  in  December,  1875,  the 
House  of  Representatives  passed  a  resolution  by  a  vote  of 
234  to  18,  declaring  that  in  its  opinion,  the  precedent  estab 
lished  by  Washington  and  other  Presidents  of  the  United 
States,  in  retiring  from  the  Presidential  office  after  their  sec 
ond  terms,  had  become,  by  universal  concurrence,  a  part  of 
our  republican  system  of  government,  and  that  any  depar 
ture  from  this  time-honored  custom  would  be  unwise,  un 
patriotic,  and  fraught  with  peril  to  our  free  institutions. 

The  passage  of  this  resolution,  the  scandals  in  the  admin 
istration,  the  hard  times,  and  the  bitter  and  determined  oppo 
sition  to  General  Grant  at  this  time,  put  an  end  temporarily 
to  all  third-term  talk. 


172     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

But  during  his  absence,  when  he  was  making  his  tour  of 
the  world,  after  he  had  retired  from  the  Presidency,  Senator 
Conkling,  General  Logan,  Don  Cameron,  and  other  leading 
politicians  concluded  that  they  would  nominate  him  to 
succeed  Rutherford  B.  Hayes,  who  was  not  a  candidate. 
After  his  return  to  the  United  States,  they  secured  his  con 
sent  to  use  his  name  as  a  candidate  for  the  nomination  in 
1880;  but  after  a  bitter  fight  in  the  Chicago  Convention  they 
failed,  and  General  Garfield  obtained  the  nomination. 

Mr.  Blaine,  before  the  Convention  met,  was  the  leading 
candidate  against  General  Grant.  I  had  been  a  warm  friend 
of  Mr.  Blaine's  in  Congress;  but  as  General  Grant  was  a 
candidate  from  my  own  State,  and  as  I  was  at  that  time 
Governor  of  Illinois  and  a  candidate  for  renomination,  I 
did  not  feel  that  I  could  take  any  part  in  the  contest  between 
Grant  and  Blaine. 

When  the  State  Convention  met  to  select  a  candidate  to 
succeed  me  as  Governor,  the  contest  between  Grant  and 
Blaine  was  very  bitter.  Mr.  Blaine  and  I  had  been  very 
friendly  in  the  House ;  indeed,  I  was  one  of  the  few  personal 
friends  who  brought  him  out  as  a  candidate  for  Speaker  of 
the  House.  From  our  past  relations,  he  felt  perfectly  free 
to  write  me,  and  about  the  time  of  the  Convention,  I  re 
ceived  a  letter  from  him,  in  which  he  said,  among  other  things : 
"Why  cannot  you  put  yourself  at  the  head  of  my  forces,  and 
lead  them?  If  you  are  not  careful  you  will  fall  between." 

The  tone  of  the  letter  annoyed  me,  and  I  did  not  answer  it 
until  the  contest  was  over,  which  resulted  in  my  own  nomina 
tion,  and  until  after  the  National  Convention  met,  in  which 
Blaine  was  defeated.  I  then  wrote  him  a  letter,  informing 
him  that  I  had  been  nominated;  but,  of  course,  I  did  not 
refer  to  his  defeat. 

During  the  session  of  the  convention  in  Springfield,  or 


GRANT  173 

about  the  time  it  was  to  convene,  General  Logan  came  down 
from  Chicago,  proceeding  at  once  to  my  house.  He  told 
me  that  he  desired  that  I  should  help  him  to  secure  the  dele 
gation  for  General  Grant. 

I  replied:  "General  Logan,  if  you  are  my  friend,  and  I 
suppose  you  are,  you  will  not  ask  me  to  take  any  part  in  this 
contest,  as  I  am  a  candidate  for  renomination  myself." 

He  was  a  little  huffy  about  it,  and  seemed  to  be  disap 
pointed  that  I  would  not  do  as  he  asked.  And  I  may  re 
mark  that  this  was  characteristic  of  Logan.  He  went  away 
considerably  out  of  humor,  but  saying  nothing  especially  to 
the  point. 

A  short  time  afterwards  the  Hon.  Charles  B.  Farwell, 
who  was  later  an  honored  colleague  of  mine  in  the  Senate, 
drove  up  to  my  house  and  said:  "Cullom,  I  want  you  to  help 
me  carry  this  State  for  Elaine." 

4 'Charley,"  I  replied,  "y°u  know  very  well  that  I  am  a 
candidate  for  reelection;  and  you  know  very  well,  also,  that 
if  I  were  to  take  a  hand  in  this  contest,  I  would  probably  be 
beaten."  He  agreed  with  me,  and  went  away  satisfied,  as 
suring  me  that  in  his  opinion  I  was  doing  the  right  thing. 

The  contest  in  our  State  Convention  between  Elaine  and 
Grant  lasted  for  at  least  three  days,  and  resulted  in  the  di 
vision  of  the  delegation  to  the  National  Convention,  part 
for  Grant  and  part  for  Elaine.  I  had  quite  a  contest  for 
the  nomination,  but  was  finally  named  on  the  fourth  bal 
lot.  I  had  expected  to  be  nominated  on  the  third  ballot. 
Farwell  was  about  my  office  a  good  deal  during  the  conven 
tion.  When  the  third  ballot  was  taken,  and  I  had  not  been 
nominated,  I  said:  "Farwell,  there  is  something  wrong  up 
stairs;  I  wish  you  would  go  up  and  straighten  it  out." 

He  went;  but  what  he  did,  if  anything,  I  do  not  know. 
However,  I  was  nominated  on  the  next  ballot. 


174     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

General  Grant  was  nominated  both  the  first  and  second 
times  without  opposition.  He  was  first  nominated  in  Chi 
cago,  with  great  enthusiasm.  The  second  time  he  was  nom 
inated  in  Philadelphia.  I  was  chairman  of  the  Illinois  del 
egation  at  Philadelphia,  and  as  such  placed  him  in  nomina 
tion. 

I  believe  I  made  about  the  shortest  nominating  speech  for 
a  Republican  candidate  for  President  ever  made  in  a  Na 
tional  Republican  Convention.  I  said: 

"GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  CONVENTION:  On  behalf  of  the  great  Republi 
can  party  of  Illinois,  and  that  of  the  Union  —  in  the  name  of  liberty,  of 
loyalty,  of  justice,  and  of  law  —  in  the  interest  of  economy,  of  good 
government,  of  peace,  and  of  the  equal  rights  of  all  —  remembering  with 
profound  gratitude  his  glorious  achievements  in  the  field,  and  his  noble 
statesmanship  as  Chief  Magistrate  of  this  great  Nation  —  I  nominate  as 
President  of  the  United  States,  for  a  second  term,  Ulysses  S.  Grant." 

There  was  a  considerable  contest  over  the  platform,  and, 
as  usual,  it  was  determined  to  adopt  the  platform  before 
making  the  nominations  of  President  and  Vice-President. 
But  the  Convention  became  very  restless  after  the  day  of 
speechmaking ;  evening  was  approaching,  and  the  Committee 
on  Platform  being  still  out,  it  was  determined  to  make  the 
nomination  for  President  that  day.  I  mounted  the  plat 
form,  and  in  the  brief  speech  I  have  quoted,  placed  General 
Grant  in  nomination.  I  never  saw  such  a  fervid  audience. 
The  floors  and  galleries  were  crowded,  and  the  people  seemed 
wild  with  enthusiasm  for  Grant.  As  I  uttered  the  word 
"Grant,"  at  the  conclusion  of  my  speech,  and  his  picture  was 
lowered  from  the  ceiling  of  the  hall,  the  demonstration  was 
indescribable. 

While  we  were  waiting  for  the  Committee  on  Platform 
to  report,  there  were  quite  a  number  of  speeches  by  favorite 


GRANT  175 

sons  of  the  different  States,  Senator  Logan  and  Governor 
Oglesby,  from  Illinois,  being  among  them. 

Senator  Logan's  speech  is  not  very  clear  in  my  memory; 
but  I  do  remember  very  well  the  speech  by  Governor  Oglesby. 
He  made  a  wonderful  impression.  I  do  not  recall  that  I 
ever  saw  a  man  electrify  an  audience  as  did  Governor 
Oglesby  on  that  occasion.  It  was  the  first  convention  where 
there  were  colored  men  admitted  as  delegates.  Some  of  the 
colored  delegates  occupied  the  main  floor.  Old  Garret 
Smith,  the  great  abolitionist,  was  in  the  gallery,  at  the  head 
of  the  New  York  delegation.  Oglesby  took  for  his  theme 
first  the  colored  man,  represented  there  on  the  floor  of  that 
convention,  and  then  Garret  Smith.  He  set  the  crowd  wild. 
They  cheered  him  to  the  echo.  We  adjourned  for  luncheon 
immediately  after  he  concluded  his  speech,  and  many  of  the 
delegates  asked  me  who  that  man  was.  I  was  proud  to  be 
able  to  tell  them  that  it  was  Governor  Oglesby  of  Illinois; 
and  the  remark  was  frequently  made  that  it  was  no  wonder 
that  Illinois  gave  sixty  thousand  Republican  majority  with 
such  a  man  as  its  Governor. 

The  platform  was  finally  adopted,  and  Wilson  of  Massa 
chusetts  was  nominated  for  Vice-President,  in  -place  of 
Schuyler  Coif  ax.  Colfax  was  much  mortified  at  his  defeat, 
but  it  turned  out  for  the  best,  because  Colfax  became  in 
volved  in  the  Credit  Mobilier  before  the  campaign  was  over, 
and  his  name  on  the  ticket  would  have  injured  the  chances 
for  success.  Wilson,  who  was  nominated  to  succeed  Col 
fax  as  Vice-President,  was  a  very  good  man.  He  was  a 
Senator,  and  it  was  said  of  him  that  he  came  from  the  shoe 
maker's  bench  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States. 

General  Grant  got  along  very  well  during  his  first  term 
as  President.  He  was  wonderfully  popular,  and  no  one 


176     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

could  have  beaten  him ;  but  during  his  second  term,  so  many 
scandals  came  to  light,  and  the  finances  were  in  such  bad 
shape,  that  generally  his  second  term  as  President  cannot  be 
said  to  have  been  a  success.  One  trouble  with  him  as  Pres 
ident  was  that  he  placed  too  implicit  reliance  on  those  about 
him,  and  he  never  could  be  convinced  that  any  friend  of  his 
could  do  a  wrong.  Some  of  his  friends  were  clearly  guilty 
of  the  grossest  kind  of  misconduct,  and  yet  he  would  not  be 
convinced  of  it,  and  stuck  to  them  until  they  nearly  dragged 
him  down  into  disgrace  with  them.  He  was  not  a  politician. 
Before  entering  the  White  House  he  had  had  no  previous 
experience  in  public  office.  For  a  considerable  time  he  at 
tempted  to  act  as  Chief  Executive  with  the  same  arbitrary 
power  that  he  used  as  commander  of  an  army ;  hence  he  was 
constantly  getting  into  trouble  with  Senators  and  Repre 
sentatives. 

I  remember  one  little  experience  along  this  line  which  I 
had  with  him.  It  is  an  unwritten  rule  that  Representatives 
in  Congress,  if  in  harmony  with  the  Administration,  control 
the  post-office  appointments  in  their  respective  districts.  On 
my  recommendation  Isaac  Keyes  was  appointed  postmaster 
of  my  own  city  of  Springfield.  Much  to  my  astonishment 
and  mortification,  in  a  month,  without  any  warning,  without 
any  request  for  Keyes'  resignation,  General  Grant  sent  in  the 
appointment  of  Elder  Crane.  When  I  came  to  inquire  the 
cause,  he  said  he  had  just  happened  to  remember  that  he 
had  promised  the  office  to  Elder  Crane,  and  he  immediately 
sent  in  the  appointment  without  considering  for  a  minute 
the  position  in  which  he  left  Keyes  and  the  embarrassment  it 
would  cause  me. 

Sometime  afterward,  as  Colonel  Bluford  Wilson  tells  me, 
General  Grant  asked  Colonel  Wilson,  then  Solicitor  of  the 
Treasury,  who  would  make  a  good  Commissioner  of  Internal 


ULYSSES   S.  GRANT 


GRANT  177 

Revenue.  Colonel  Wilson  replied  that  Cullom  was  just  the 
man  for  the  place,  and  General  Grant  said  at  once,  "I  will 
appoint  him."  When  Colonel  Wilson  went  to  the  White 
House  with  the  commission  prepared  for  my  appointment, 
General  Grant  said:  "I  have  changed  my  mind  about  mak 
ing  that  appointment.  I  offended  Cullom  in  reference  to 
the  appointment  of  a  postmaster  of  his  town;  and  if  I 
should  appoint  him  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  now, 
I  know  he  would  decline  it,  so  I  will  not  appoint  him." 

And  in  this  he  was  quite  right.  I  would  have  declined 
the  office,  not  because  I  was  offended  at  him,  but  because  I 
would  not  accept  that  or  any  other  appointive  office. 

Not  being  quite  certain  that  my  memory  served  me  cor 
rectly  in  reference  to  this  incident,  I  took  occasion  to  ask 
Colonel  Bluford  Wilson,  who  had  called  on  me  at  Wash 
ington,  to  give  me  the  facts,  which  he  later  did  in  a  long  letter 
that  sets  forth  the  facts  somewhat  more  elaborately  than  I 
have  given  them,  but  presenting  the  incident  in  an  identical 
light. 

While  I  would  not  say  that  General  Grant  was  a  failure 
as  President,  certain  it  is  that  he  added  nothing  to  his  great 
fame  as  a  soldier.  Indeed,  in  the  opinion  of  very  many 
people,  who  were  his  friends  and  well-wishers,  when  he  re 
tired  from  the  White  House  he  had  detracted  rather  than 
added  to  his  name.  It  would  probably  have  been  better  if 
General  Grant  had  been  content  with  his  military  success, 
and  had  entered  neither  politics  nor  business. 

General  Grant  was  one  of  the  greatest  soldiers  of  modern 
times;  indeed,  if  not  of  all  time.  Standing  as  he  does  the 
peer  of  Frederick,  Napoleon,  Wellington,  the  time  will  come 
when  the  very  fact  that  he  was  President  of  the  United 
States  will  be  forgotten,  while  he  will  be  remembered  only 
as  one  of  the  world's  great  captains. 


178     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

The  last  time  I  saw  the  General  was  about  a  month  before 
he  died.  I  was  in  New  York,  with  the  select  Committee  on 
Interstate  Commerce,  and  on  Sunday  morning  we  learned 
that  General  Grant,  General  Arthur,  and  ex-President 
Hayes  were  all  in  town,  and  that  Grant  and  Arthur  were 
ill.  We  determined  to  call  on  each  of  them. 

We  first  called  on  General  Grant  at  his  home,  and  found 
that  his  son,  General  Frederick  D.  Grant,  was  with  him. 
To  him  we  sent  our  cards  and  asked  to  see  his  father.  He 
said  he  would  ascertain,  and  he  came  back  directly  and  said 
that  his  father  would  be  glad  to  see  us,  but  cautioned  us 
not  to  permit  him  to  talk  too  much,  as  the  trouble  was  in  his 
throat.  We  went  in  and  took  seats  for  a  moment.  He 
greeted  us  all  very  cordially,  and  seemed  to  be  specially  inter 
ested  in  meeting  Senator  Gorman.  He  wanted  to  talk,  and 
did  talk  so  rapidly  and  so  incessantly  that,  fearing  it  was 
injuring  him,  we  arose  from  our  seats  and  told  him  that  we 
had  called  simply  to  pay  our  respects,  and  expressed  our 
gratification  that  he  was  so  well. 

I  can  see  him  yet,  as  I  saw  him  then.  He  was  sitting  up, 
surrounded  by  the  manuscript  of  his  memoirs.  He  knew 
that  his  end  was  approaching,  and  he  talked  about  it  quietly 
and  unconcernedly ;  said  he  was  about  through  with  his  book, 
that  if  he  could  live  a  month  or  two  longer  he  could  improve 
it,  but  did  not  seem  to  feel  very  much  concern  whether  he 
had  any  more  time  or  not.  Mrs.  Grant  and  Nellie,  and 
Mrs.  Frederick  D.  Grant  were  in  an  adjoining  room,  with 
the  door  open,  and  knowing  them  all  very  well,  I  went  in  to 
pay  my  respects.  Mrs.  Grant  at  once  inquired  about  my 
daughters.  I  told  her  that  one  of  them  was  married,  and 
she  expressed  surprise.  General  Grant,  hearing  us,  came 
into  the  room  and  said,  "Julia,  don't  you  remember  that  we 


GRANT  179 

received  cards  to  the  wedding? "  He  again  began  to  talk, 
so  I  took  my  leave. 

From  there  we  called  on  General  Arthur,  and  then  on 
General  Hayes.  Both  passed  away  within  a  short  time. 

I  returned  to  my  home  in  Springfield,  and  in  about  a 
month  the  news  came  that  General  Grant  was  dead.  On 
the  day  of  his  funeral  in  New  York,  in  cities  of  any  im 
portance  in  the  country,  services  were  held.  Services  were 
conducted  in  Springfield,  on  which  occasion  I  delivered  the 
principal  address. 


CHAPTER  XII 

GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN 

ENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  was  a  man  much  more 
VJf  capable  of  accomplishing  results  than  either  General 
Palmer  or  General  Oglesby. 

I  first  met  him  when  he  was  a  member  of  the  Legislature, 
in  1856.  He  was  a  Democrat  then,  and  a  very  active  and 
aggressive  one.  It  was  in  that  year  that  we  first  elected  a 
Republican  Administration  in  Illinois,  the  Republican  party 
having  been  organized  only  two  years  previously.  Bissell 
was  elected  Governor;  Hatch,  Secretary  of  State;  and  Du- 
bois,  Auditor. 

Governor  Bissell  was  ill,  having  suffered  a  stroke  of  pa 
ralysis,  and  it  became  necessary  for  the  Legislature,  after 
organizing,  to  go  to  the  Executive  Mansion  to  witness  the 
administration  of  the  oath  of  office  to  him.  After  the  Legis 
lature  reconvened  in  their  respective  Houses,  General  Logan 
immediately  obtained  recognition  and  made  a  bitter  attack 
on  Governor  Bissell  on  the  ground  that  the  latter  had  sworn 
to  a  falsehood,  he  having  challenged,  or  been  challenged  by, 
Jefferson  Davis  to  fight  a  duel.  The  duel  was  never  ac 
tually  fought;  but  Governor  Bissell  took  the  ground  that 
whatever  did  occur  was  outside  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State 
of  Illinois,  and  he  therefore  could  truthfully  take  the  oath  of 
office.  Logan  was  then  about  as  strong  a  Democrat  as  he 
afterwards  was  a  Republican.  His  attack  on  Bissell  was 
resented  by  Republicans  and  under  the  circumstances  was 

180 


GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  181 

regarded  as  cruel.  I  became  very  much  prejudiced  against 
him. 

After  this  episode  Logan  was  elected  to  Congress  as  a 
Democrat,  and  was  a  follower  of  Douglas.  Douglas  was 
true  to  the  Union,  and  after  he  made  his  famous  speech  be 
fore  the  Legislature  at  Springfield,  General  Logan  entered 
the  war  and  finally  became  a  Republican. 

It  was  alleged  that  there  was  an  understanding  between 
Douglas  and  the  Democratic  delegation  in  Congress  from 
Illinois  that  they  should  all  act  together  in  whatever  course 
they  pursued.  The  delegation  from  Illinois  contained  some 
very  able  men,  among  them  being  General  Logan.  Douglas 
came  out  for  the  Union  without  consulting  his  colleagues  in 
the  delegation,  and  it  was  said  that  General  Logan  and  the 
other  Democratic  members  of  the  delegation  were  quite  an 
gry.  However,  they  all  followed  Douglas  and  became  loyal 
Union  men. 

Like  Governor  Oglesby,  General  Logan  had  a  brief  mil 
itary  service  in  the  Mexican  War,  and  also  like  Governor 
Oglesby,  and  General  McClernand,  he  was  among  the  first  to 
raise  a  regiment  for  service  in  the  Civil  War.  He  resigned 
his  seat  in  Congress  in  1861,  and  immediately  went  into 
active  service.  Senator  Douglas  and  General  Logan  did 
much  to  save  Southern  Illinois  to  the  Union,  and  that  por 
tion  of  the  State  contributed  its  full  quota  to  the  Union 
Army. 

To  describe  the  part  General  Logan  took  in  the  Civil  War, 
after  he  raised  the  Thirty-first  Illinois  Regiment  and  took 
the  field,  would  be  to  recite  the  history  of  the  war  itself. 
The  records  of  his  bravery  at  Belmont ;  of  his  gallant  charge 
at  Fort  Donelson,  where,  as  a  Colonel,  he  was  dangerously 
wounded;  of  his  service  as  Major-General  commanding  the 
Army  of  the  Tennessee;  of  the  memorable  siege  of  Vicks- 


182     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

burg,  when  with  the  great  leader  of  the  Union  armies  he 
stood  knocking  at  the  door  of  that  invincible  stronghold;  of 
his  service  with  Sherman  on  his  famous  march  to  the  sea,  all 
are  written  on  the  pages  of  history  and  lend  undying  lustre 
to  the  name  of  Logan. 

He  was  a  natural  soldier.  His  shoulders  were  broad,  his 
presence  was  commanding;  with  his  swarthy  face  and  coal- 
black  hair,  "and  eye  like  Mars,  to  threaten  and  command,"  he 
was  every  inch  a  warrior.  There  is  no  question  that  Gen 
eral  Logan  was  the  greatest  volunteer  officer  of  the  Civil 
War. 

After  the  war  Logan  returned  to  Illinois,  intending  to 
reenter  the  practice  of  the  law;  but  he  loved  public  life  and 
politics,  was  the  idol  of  the  people  of  his  section  of  the  State, 
and  was  soon  elected  Congressman-at-large  on  the  Republi 
can  ticket.  When  I  entered  the  House  in  1865,  I  found 
General  Logan  there,  ranking  as  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
more  radical  Republicans.  He  was  a  forceful  speaker,  and 
did  his  full  share  as  one  of  the  managers  on  the  part  of  the 
House  in  the  impeachment  of  Andrew  Johnson. 

He  was  devoted  to  General  Grant  and  General  Grant 
was  very  fond  of  him.  General  Grant,  in  talking  of  General 
Logan  and  Senator  Morton  of  Indiana,  used  to  say  that 
they  were  the  two  most  persistent  men  in  the  Senate  in  se 
curing  offices  for  their  friends;  but  there  was  this  difference 
between  them :  if  Morton  came  to  him  and  wanted  ten  offices 
and  he  gave  him  one,  he  would  go  away  feeling  perfectly  sat 
isfied,  and  make  the  impression  on  the  people  that  he  was  run 
ning  the  Administration ;  while  if  Logan  came  to  the  White 
House  to  secure  ten  offices,  and  did  not  get  more  than  nine 
of  them,  he  would  raise  a  great  row,  and  claim  that  he  could 
not  get  anything  out  of  the  Administration. 

But  Logan  stood  strongly  for  General  Grant,  not  only 


GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  183 

during  his  two  terms,  where  he  had  little  or  no  opposition, 
but  he  was  one  of  the  leaders  in  the  unsuccessful  attempt  to 
nominate  him  for  a  third  term.  Logan,  Conkling,  Cameron 
and  others  failed,  and  I  believe  that  General  Logan  felt  the 
failure  more  than  even  General  Grant  himself. 

General  Logan  was  a  tremendously  industrious  man.  He 
was  always  doing  favors  for  his  people,  and  seemed  to  de 
light  in  being  of  service  to  any  one.  That  was  the  difference 
between  him  and  Governor  Oglesby.  Logan  was  always 
willing  and  anxious  to  do  favors  for  people,  while  Oglesby 
was  not. 

I  remember  an  incident  that  illustrates  this  very  well. 
Jacob  Bunn,  of  Springfield,  as  honest  a  man  as  ever  lived 
and  a  man  of  high  standing,  was  compelled  to  take  a  distillery 
in  part  payment  of  a  very  large  debt  which  was  owing  to 
him,  and  to  make  it  of  any  account  he  had  to  operate  it  until 
such  a  time  as  he  could  dispose  of  it.  He  had  some  explana 
tion  he  desired  to  make  to  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Rev 
enue,  and  he  came  to  Washington  and  asked  Governor 
Oglesby,  who  was  then  in  the  Senate,  to  introduce  him  to 
the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue.  Oglesby  knew 
Eunn  very  well,  and  yet  he  cross-examined  him  at  great 
length  and  detail.  Bunn  left  Oglesby  and  next  morning 
sought  Logan,  who  at  once  agreed  to  perform  the  favor, 
with  the  result  that  Mr.  Bunn  very  readily  adjusted  the  mat 
ter  with  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue.  Bunn 
afterwards  said  to  me:  "I  had  a  good  deal  more  trouble  con 
vincing  Governor  Oglesby  that  I  was  an  honest  man  than  I 
had  convincing  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue." 

I  give  this  incident  as  illustrating  the  difference  between 
the  characters  of  Oglesby  and  Logan. 

The  latter's  honesty  and  integrity  were  never  doubted.  I 
believe  he  would  not  have  hesitated  for  a  moment  to  kill  any 


184     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

one  who  would  have  questioned  his  honesty.  He  was  a  poor 
man,  and  when  I  came  to  the  Senate  as  his  colleague  we  often 
sat  together  condoling  with  each  other  on  our  poverty,  and 
"abusing"  the  men  in  the  Senate  who  were  wealthy.  That 
was  one  of  the  common  bonds  between  us.  When  I  became 
well  acquainted  with  General  Logan,  I  believed  in  him  and 
admired  him  as  one  of  the  ablest  men  of  Illinois.  He  was 
a  man  of  intense  feeling,  intense  friendships,  and  I  might 
also  add  that  he  was  a  man  of  the  most  intense  hatreds. 

General  Logan,  while  never  doubting  his  friends,  yet  ex 
pected  his  friends  to  swear  devotion  to  him  every  time  they 
saw  him.  He  was  "touchy"  in  this  respect,  and  would  not 
readily  overlook  any  fancied  slights.  On  one  occasion,  my 
old  friend,  the  Hon.  David  T.  Littler,  now  deceased,  of 
Springfield,  Illinois,  who  was  also  a  warm  friend  of  Logan, 
went  to  Washington,  and  neglected  to  call  on  Logan  until  he 
had  been  there  several  days.  Logan  knew  that  he  was  in 
town,  and  when  he  finally  did  call,  Logan  abused  him  roundly 
for  not  coming  to  see  him  the  first  thing.  It  made  Littler 
angry  for  the  time  being,  and  he  showed  his  resentment  as 
only  Littler  could.  He  made  Logan  apologize  and  agree 
never  to  find  fault  with  him  again.  They  were  on  good 
terms  as  long  as  they  lived. 

General  Logan  was  my  friend,  and  was  always  for  me 
when  I  was  running  for  office.  It  was  sometimes  tolerably 
hard  for  him  to  be  for  me  as  against  a  soldier,  because  there 
was  never  a  man  who  was  more  thoroughly  devoted  to  the 
soldiers.  As  colleagues  in  the  Senate,  we  got  along  very 
agreeably  and  never  had  any  cross-purposes  or  differences 
of  opinion. 

The  only  time  I  remember  of  ever  having  any  feeling  at 
all  was  on  one  occasion  when  Senator  Logan,  Senator  Evarts, 
and  Senator  Teller  were  strongly  advocating  the  seating  of 


Painted  and  copyrighted  by  H.  K  'Sounders 


JOHN   A.  LOGAN 


GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  185 

Henry  B.  Payne,  of  Ohio,  as  a  matter  of  right  and  without 
investigation.  I  was  disposed  to  vote  for  the  taking  of  evi 
dence  and  an  investigation.  When  the  discussion  was  going 
on,  I  stated  to  Logan  that  I  felt  like  voting  in  favor  of  the 
investigation.  He  was  very  much  out  of  humor  about  it.  I 
consulted  with  some  friends  in  the  Senate  as  to  what  I 
ought  to  do  under  the  circumstances,  and  they  advised  me,  in 
view  of  General  Logan's  personal  feeling  on  the  subject  — 
and  he  felt  that  he  was  personally  involved  —  that  I  ought 
to  vote  with  him. 

After  the  vote  was  announced,  I  went  around  to  General 
Logan's  seat,  and  he  expressed  intense  gratification  that  I 
had  voted  with  him,  remarking  that  if  I  had  been  involved  in 
a  struggle  as  he  was,  he  would  take  the  roof  off  the  House 
before  he  would  let  me  be  beaten ;  and  I  believe  he  would  have 
gone  to  almost  any  extent. 

I  then  said  to  him:  "General  Logan,  I  want  to  assure  you 
that  hereafter  you  must  not  feel  concerned  about  my  vote 
being  the  same  as  yours.  In  other  words,  when  I  want  to 
vote  one  way  and  you  want  to  vote  another,  I  shall  be  per 
fectly  satisfied,  and  shall  have  no  feeling  against  you  on  ac 
count  of  it ;  I  want  you  to  feel  the  same  way  when  conditions 
are  reversed."  He  acquiesced  in  this  proposal;  but  we  never 
afterwards  had  occasion  to  differ  on  any  important  question 
before  the  Senate. 

General  Logan  had  an  ambition  to  become  President,  and 
I  believe  he  would  have  realized  his  ambition  had  he  lived. 

I  placed  him  in  nomination  for  President  at  the  National 
Convention  which  met  at  Chicago  in  1884.  In  The  Wash 
ington  National  Tribune  appears  the  following  report: 

"The  next  State  that  responded  was  Illinois,  and  as  Senator  Cullom 
mounted  the  platform  to  present  the  name  of  General  John  A.  Logan, 
cheer  after  cheer  followed  him.  When  he  was  at  last  allowed  to  pro- 


186     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

ceed,  he  began  by  referring  to  the  nominations  of  Lincoln  and  Grant, 
both  from  Illinois,  and  both  nominated  at  Chicago: 

"  'In  1880,  the  party,  assembled  again  in  Chicago,  achieved  success 
by  nominating  Garfield;  and  now  in  1884,  in  the  same  State,  Illinois, 
which  has  never  wavered  in  its  adherence  to  the  Republican  party,  pre 
sents,  as  the  standard-bearer  of  that  party,  another  son,  one  whose  name 
would  be  recognized  from  one  end  of  the  land  to  the  other  as  an  able 
statesman,  a  brilliant  soldier,  and  an  honest  man  —  John  A.  Logan/ 

"The  announcement  of  General  Logan's  name  was  received  with  a 
wild  burst  of  applause,  a  great  many  persons  rising  to  their  feet,  wav 
ing  their  hats  and  handkerchiefs,  and  the  thousands  of  people  in  the 
gallery  joining  in  the  roars  of  applause.  The  cheers  were  renewed 
again  and  again.  The  speaker  resumed: 

"  'A  native  of  the  State  which  he  represents  in  the  Council  of  the 
Nation,  reared  among  the  youth  of  a  section  where  every  element  of  man 
hood  is  early  brought  into  play,  he  is  eminently  a  man  of  the  people. 
The  safety,  the  permanency,  and  the  prosperity  of  the  Nation  depend 
upon  the  courage,  the  integrity,  and  the  loyalty  of  its  citizens. 
Like  Douglas,  he  believed  that  in  time  of  war  men  must  be  either  pa 
triots  or  traitors,  and  he  threw  his  mighty  influence  on  the  side  of  the 
Union;  and  Illinois  made  a  record  second  to  none  in  the  history  of  States 
in  the  struggle  to  preserve  the  Union. 

"  'During  the  long  struggle  of  four  years  he  commanded,  under  the 
authority  of  the  Government,  first  a  regiment,  then  a  brigade,  then  a 
division,  then  an  army  corps,  and  finally  an  army.  He  remained  in 
the  service  until  the  war  closed,  when  at  the  head  of  his  army,  with 
the  scars  of  battle  upon  him,  he  marched  into  the  capital  of  the  Nation, 
and  with  the  brave  men  whom  he  had  led  on  a  hundred  hard-fought 
fields  was  mustered  out  of  the  service  under  the  very  shadow  of  the 
Capitol  building  which  he  had  left  four  years  before  as  a  member  of 
Congress  to  go  and  fight  the  battles  of  his  country. 

"  'When  the  war  was  over  and  peace  victoriously  returned,  he  was 
again  invited  by  his  fellow-citizens  to  take  his  place  in  the  Councils  of 
the  Nation.  In  a  service  of  twenty  years  in  both  Houses  of  Congress  he 
has  shown  himself  to  be  no  less  able  and  distinguished  as  a  citizen  than 
he  was  renowned  as  a  soldier.  Conservative  in  the  advocacy  of  measures 
involving  the  public  welfare,  ready  and  eloquent  in  debate,  fearless  — 
yes,  I  repeat  again,  fearless  —  in  defence  of  the  rights  of  the  weak 
against  the  oppression  of  the  strong,  he  stands  to-day  closer  to  the  great 


GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  187 

mass  of  the  people  of  this  country  than  almost  any  other  man  now  en 
gaging  public  attention/  " 

At  the  conclusion  of  my  speech  there  was  a  tremendous 
demonstration,  and  General  Prentiss  seconded  the  nomina 
tion.  General  Logan  received  sixty-three  and  one-half  votes 
on  the  first  ballot,  and  sixty-one  votes  on  the  second  and  third 
ballots. 

Immediately  after  the  third  ballot,  I  received  this  telegram 
from  General  Logan,  who  was  in  Washington: 

"WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  June  6,  1884. 
"To  SENATOR  CULLOM,  CONVENTION  HALL,  CHICAGO,  ILL.: 

"The  Republicans  of  the  States  that  must  be  relied  upon  to  elect  the 
President  having  shown  a  preference  for  Mr.  Elaine,  I  deem  it  my  duty 
not  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the  people's  choice,  and  recommend  my 
friends  to  assist  in  his  nomination.  JOHN  A.  LOGAN." 

When  Illinois  was  called  on  the  fourth  ballot,  I  attempted 
to  read  the  telegram  to  the  convention,  but  a  point  of  order 
was  raised  by  Senator  Burrows,  which  the  Chair  sustained. 
It  was  thoroughly  well  understood  in  the  convention  that  I 
had  such  a  telegram,  and  after  the  chair  sustained  the  point 
of  order  I  made  the  following  statement:  "The  Illinois  del 
egation  withdraws  the  name  of  General  John  A.  Logan,  and 
gives  for  Elaine  thirty-four  votes,  for  Logan  seven,  and  for 
Arthur  three." 

This  announcement  was  punctuated  with  another  deafen 
ing  outburst,  and  Elaine  was  nominated  amidst  great  en 
thusiasm.  After  I  withdrew  General  Logan's  name  and 
cast  the  vote  for  Elaine  the  result  was  a  foregone  conclusion. 

There  was  immediately  a  strong  disposition  to  place  Logan 
on  the  ticket  as  our  candidate  for  Vice-President.  There 
was  considerable  doubt  as  to  whether  he  would  accept. 
Finally  he  sent  a  telegram  in  which  he  said:  "The  Conven- 


188     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tion  must  do  what  they  think  best  under  the  circum 
stances." 

He  was  then  nominated  for  Vice-President  without  much 
opposition. 

It  was  a  superb  ticket,  and  every  one  thought  it  would 
sweep  the  country.  Elaine,  in  the  opinion  of  many  people, 
was  the  most  popular  statesman  since  the  days  of  Henry 
Clay ;  Logan,  the  greatest  volunteer  officer  of  the  Civil  War. 

I  do  not,  however,  believe  that  Elaine  and  Logan  got  along 
very  well  together  in  the  campaign.  In  my  opinion  Logan 
felt  that  he  would  have  been  a  stronger  candidate  for  the 
Presidency  than  Elaine,  as  after  events  proved  that  he 
would.  Had  Logan  headed  the  ticket,  there  would  have  been 
none  of  the  scandal  nor  charges  of  corruption  that  were 
made  in  the  campaign  with  Elaine  at  the  head.  There  would 
have  been  no  "Rum,  Romanism,  and  Rebellion,"  which  in  the 
opinion  of  many  people  resulted  in  the  defeat  of  Elaine  arid 
Logan. 

Whatever  the  causes,  the  ticket  was  defeated;  and  then 
came  Logan's  famous  fight  for  reelection  to  the  Senate,  con 
tinuing  three  and  a  half  months,  the  Legislature  being  tied ; 
but  the  fight  ended  by  a  rather  clever  trick  on  the  part  of 
Dan  Shepard  and  S.  H.  Jones  of  Springfield,  in  electing  by 
a  "still  hunt"  a  Republican  in  the  thirty-fourth  District  to 
succeed  a  Democrat  who  died  during  the  session,  and  finally 
on  May  19,  1885, 1  received  a  telegram  from  Logan  while  in 
New  York  saying,  "I  have  been  elected." 

Three  or  four  days  before  General  Logan's  death  he  and 
Mrs.  Logan  were  at  my  house  to  dinner,  to  meet  some  friends 
-  General  and  Mrs.  Henderson  and  Senator  Allison.  After 
dinner,  we  were  in  the  smoking-room.  General  Logan  was 
talking  about  the  book  he  had  recently  written,  showing  a 
conspiracy  on  the  part  of  the  South,  entitled  "The  Great 


GENERAL  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  189 

Conspiracy."  He  had  sent  each  of  us  a  copy  of  the  book, 
and  he  remarked  that  he  ventured  to  say  that  neither  of  us 
had  read  a  word  of  it ;  the  truth  was  that  we  had  not,  and  we 
admitted  it. 

General  and  Mrs.  Logan  went  home  a  little  early,  because 
he  was  then  suffering  with  rheumatism.  They  invited  Mrs. 
Cullom  and  me  to  dinner  the  following  Sunday  evening. 
General  Logan  had  grown  worse,  and  he  could  not  attend 
at  the  table,  but  rested  on  a  couch  in  an  adjoining  room.  He 
never  recovered,  and  passed  away  some  two  or  three  days 
afterward.  I  was  present  at  his  death-bed.  The  last  words 
he  uttered  were,  " Cullom,  I  am  terribly  sick." 

The  death  of  no  other  General,  with  the  possible  exception 
of  General  Grant,  was  so  sorrowfully  and  universally 
mourned  by  the  volunteer  soldiery  of  the  Union  as  was  the 
death  of  General  Logan. 


CHAPTER  XIII  fj 

GENERAL   JOHN    M.    PALMER 

ENERAL  PALMER  had  a  long,  varied,  and  honor- 
Vj"  able  career,  beginning  as  an  Anti-Nebraska  Democrat 
in  the  State  Senate  of  Illinois,  in  1855,  and  ending  as  a  Gold 
Democrat  in  the  United  States  Senate  in  1897,  after  being 
for  a  time  a  Republican. 

I  first  met  him  as  a  member  of  the  State  Senate,  in 
which  service  he  showed  considerable  ability.  His  one 
leading  characteristic,  I  should  say,  was  his  independence, 
without  any  regard  to  what  party  he  might  belong  to  or 
what  the  question  might  be.  He  would  not  yield  his  own 
convictions  to  his  party.  If  the  party  to  which  he  belonged 
differed  from  him  on  any  question,  he  did  not  hesitate  to 
abandon  it  and  join  the  opposition  party;  and  this  change 
he  did  make  several  times  during  his  public  career.  He 
was  one  of  the  four  Anti-Nebraska  Democrats  in  the  Leg 
islature  of  1855,  who  might  be  said  to  have  defeated  Lin 
coln  for  the  Senate  by  supporting  Trumbull,  until  it  be 
came  apparent  that  if  Lincoln  continued  as  a  candidate, 
Governor  Matteson  would  be  elected.  Lincoln  sacrificed 
himself  to  insure  the  election  of  Judge  Trumbull,  a  Free- 
soiler.  The  other  Anti-Nebraska  Democrats,  who  with 
General  Palmer,  elected  Trumbull,  were  Norman  B.  Judd, 
Burton  C.  Cook,  G.  T.  Allen,  and  Henry  S.  Baker,  the 
last  two  from  Madison  County. 

For  some  reason  or  other  General  Palmer  resigned  from 
the  Senate.  He  was  one  of  the  first  to  join  the  Republican 

190 


GENERAL  JOHN  M.  PALMER     191 

party.  He  was  a  delegate  to  the  first  Republican  State 
Convention  of  Illinois.  I  attended  that  convention,  and 
recall  that  General  Palmer  made  quite  an  impression  on  the 
assemblage,  in  discussing  some  question  with  General  Tur 
ner,  himself  quite  an  able  man,  and  then  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  of  the  Illinois  Legislature.  In 
tellectually,  General  Palmer  was  a  superior  man,  but  he 
lacked  stability  of  judgment.  You  were  never  quite  sure 
that  you  could  depend  on  him,  or  feel  any  certainty  as  to 
what  course  he  would  take  on  any  question. 

His  qualifications  as  a  lawyer  were  not  exceptional,  never 
theless  I  would  rather  have  had  him  as  my  attorney  to  try  a 
bad  case  than  almost  any  lawyer  I  ever  knew ;  his  talent  for 
manipulating  a  jury  nearly,  if  not  quite,  offset  all  his  legal 
shortcomings. 

General  Palmer  was  well  known  as  the  friend  of  the  col 
ored  people,  both  individually  and  as  a  race.  His  sym 
pathy  for  them  was  so  thoroughly  understood,  that  when 
ever  a  colored  man  had  an  important  case,  or  whenever  there 
was  a  case  involving  the  rights  of  the  colored  people  —  such, 
for  instance,  as  the  school  question  of  Alton  —  General 
Palmer  was  appealed  to,  and  he  would  take  the  case,  no 
matter  how  much  trouble  and  how  little  remuneration  there 
would  be  in  it  for  him. 

He  started  out  as  a  Democrat,  but  became  a  strong  Re 
publican,  and  so  continued  for  many  years;  but  finally  he 
became  dissatisfied  with  the  Republican  party  and  left  it  to 
support  Tilden  for  President.  He  continued  a  Democrat, 
being  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate  as  such;  but  he 
left  the  regular  organization  of  that  party,  and  became  the 
head  of  the  Gold  Democratic  party,  was  its  candidate  for 
President,  and  as  such  advised  his  friends  to  vote  for  Mc- 
Kinley. 


192     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

He  was  the  Republican  Governor  of  Illinois  during  the 
great  Chicago  fire.  He  acted  with  the  poorest  kind  of 
judgment  in  his  controversy  with  General  Sheridan  and  the 
National  Administration,  for  using  the  Federal  troops  in 
Chicago  to  protect  the  lives  and  property  of  the  people  of 
that  stricken  city.  He  had  visited  Chicago,  witnessed  the 
splendid  work  which  the  troops  were  doing,  seemed  to  be 
satisfied,  returned  to  Springfield,  and  commenced  a  quarrel 
with  General  Sheridan  and  President  Grant  over  the  right 
of  the  National  Administration  to  send  troops  into  Chicago ; 
and  this  quarrel  finally  became  so  bitter  that  it  was  one  of 
the  reasons  for  his  leaving  the  Republican  party. 

General  Palmer  had  a  fairly  good  record  as  an  officer 
during  the  Civil  War;  but  he  did  far  better  at  the  head  of 
the  Department  of  Kentucky  than  he  did  as  a  fighting  gen 
eral.  He  was  a  native  Kentuckian,  understood  the  people, 
was  a  man  of  good  nature  and  considerable  tact,  and  handled 
that  trying  situation  very  much  to  the  satisfaction  of  Mr. 
Lincoln.  He  might  have  had  a  brilliant  record  as  a  general 
had  it  not  been  for  his  unfortunate  controversy  with  General 
Sherman  at  the  capture  of  Atlanta,  which  resulted  in  his  re 
signing  his  command  as  head  of  the  Fourteenth  Army 
Corps,  and  being  granted  leave  to  return  to  Illinois,  there 
to  await  further  orders.  General  Sherman  says  of  this  inci 
dent  in  his  memoirs : 

"I  placed  the  Fourteenth  Corps  (Palmer's)  under  General  Scho- 
field's  orders.  This  corps  numbered  at  the  time  17,288  infantry  and 
826  artillery;  but  General  Palmer  claimed  to  rank  General  Schofield 
in  the  date  of  commission  as  Major-General,  and  denied  the  latter's 
right  to  exercise  command  over  him.  General  Palmer  was  a  man  of 
ability,  but  was  not  enterprising.  His  three  divisions  were  compact 
and  strong,  well  commanded,  admirable  on  the  defensive  but  slow  to 
move  or  to  act  on  the  offensive.  His  corps  had  sustained  up  to  that 
time  fewer  hard  knocks  than  any  other  corps  in  the  whole  army,  and 


GENERAL  JOHN  M.  PALMER     193 

I  was  anxious  to  give  it  a  chance.  I  always  expected  to  have  a  des 
perate  fight  to  get  possession  of  the  Macon  Road,  which  was  then  the 
vital  objective  of  the  campaign.  Its  possession  by  us  would  in  my 
judgment  result  in  the  capture  of  Atlanta  and  give  us  the  fruits  of  vic 
tory.  ...  On  the  fourth  of  August  I  ordered  General  Schofield  to 
make  a  bold  attack  on  the  railroad,  anywhere  about  East  Point,  and  or 
dered  General  Palmer  to  report  to  him  for  duty.  He  at  once  denied 
General  Schofield's  right  to  command  him;  but,  after  examining  the 
dates  of  their  respective  commissions,  and  hearing  their  arguments,  I 
wrote  to  General  Palmer: 

"  'From  the  statements  made  by  yourself  and  General  Schofield  to 
day,  my  decision  is,  that  he  ranks  you  as  a  Major-General,  being  of  the 
same  date  of  present  commission,  by  reason  of  his  previous  superior 
rank  as  a  brigadier-general.  The  movements  of  to-morrow  are  so  im 
portant  that  the  orders  of  the  superior  on  that  flank  must  be  regarded 
as  military  orders  and  not  in  the  nature  of  cooperation.  I  did  hope 
that  there  would  be  no  necessity  for  my  making  this  decision,  but  it  is 
better  for  all  parties  interested  that  no  question  of  rank  should  occur 
in  actual  battle.  The  Sandtown  Road  and  the  railroad  if  possible  must 
be  gained  to-morrow  if  it  costs  half  your  command.  I  regard  the  loss 
of  time  this  afternoon  as  equal  to  the  loss  of  two  thousand  men.' 

"I  also  communicated  the  substance  of  this  to  General  Thomas,  to 
whose  army  Palmer's  corps  belonged,  who  replied  on  the  fifth: 

"  'I  regret  to  hear  that  Palmer  has  taken  the  course  he  has,  and  I 
know  that  he  intends  to  offer  his  resignation  as  soon  as  he  can  properly 
do  so.  I  recommend  that  his  application  be  granted/ 

"On  the  fifth  I  again  wrote  to  General  Palmer,  arguing  the  point 
with  him,  as  a  friend,  not  to  resign  at  that  crisis  lest  his  motives  might 
be  misconstrued  and  because  it  might  damage  his  future  career  in  civil 
life;  but  at  the  same  time  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  say  to  him  that  the 
operations  on  that  flank  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  had  not  been  satis 
factory,  not  imputing  to  him  any  want  of  energy  or  skill,  but  insisting 
that  the  events  did  not  keep  pace  with  my  desires.  .  .  . 

"I  sanctioned  the  movement  and  ordered  two  of  Palmer's  divisions  to 
follow  in  support  of  Schofield,  and  summoned  General  Palmer  to  meet 
me  in  person.  He  came  on  the  sixth  to  my  headquarters  and  insisted  on 
his  resignation  being  accepted,  for  which  formal  act  I  referred  him 
to  General  Thomas.  He  then  rode  to  General  Thomas's  camp,  where 
he  made  a  written  resignation  of  his  office  as  commander  of  the  Fourteenth 
13 


194     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Corps  and  was  granted  the  usual  leave  of  absence  to  go  to  his  home  in 
Illinois,  there  to  await  further  orders." 

I  quote  freely  from  General  Sherman  on  this  incident,  as 
I  do  not  want  to  do  General  Palmer  an  injustice.  No  one 
for  a  moment  doubted  General  Palmer's  bravery,  and  I 
must  say  that  it  took  a  brave  man,  and  I  might  add  an  ex 
traordinarily  stubborn  man,  to  resign  a  magnificent  com 
mand  just  before  one  of  the  great  movements  of  the  war  on 
a  mere  question  of  some  other  general's  outranking  him. 

I  happened  to  be  on  the  same  ferry-boat  crossing  from  St. 
Louis  with  General  Palmer  when  he  was  taken  home  ill. 
He  had  brought  a  colored  servant  with  him,  who  accompanied 
him  to  his  home  in  Carlinville.  It  created  considerable  ex 
citement,  and  General  Palmer  was  indicted  for  bringing  the 
colored  man  into  the  State.  There  was  not  much  disposition 
to  try  him,  but  he  insisted  on  being  placed  on  trial,  con 
ducted  his  own  defence,  and  was  acquitted. 

He  made  an  honest,  conscientious  Governor,  but  did  not 
work  in  harmony  with  the  Legislature.  He  vetoed  more 
bills  than  any  other  Governor  before  or  since.  His  vetoes 
became  too  common  to  bear  any  influence,  and  a  great  many 
of  the  bills  were  passed  over  his  veto. 

I  was  very  much  opposed  to  his  renomination.  I  sup 
ported  Governor  Oglesby,  and  I  prepared  a  letter,  to  be 
signed  by  members  of  the  Legislature,  asking  Governor 
Oglesby  to  become  a  candidate.  Furthermore,  an  agent  was 
employed  to  go  to  Decatur  to  remain  there  until  he  obtained 
a  favorable  reply  from  Oglesby,  and  then  go  to  Chicago  and 
have  the  letter  and  reply  published  in  the  Chicago  papers. 

The  scheme  worked  successfully.  Governor  Oglesby  was 
nominated  and  elected. 

Oglesby,  Palmer,  Logan,  and  Yates  were  all  ambitious  to 
go  to  the  Senate,  and  were  rivals  for  the  place  at  one  time  or 


r 


JOHN    M.  PALMER 


GENERAL  JOHN  M.  PALMER     195 

another,  and  they  all  succeeded  in  their  ambition,  Palmer 
being  the  last.  When  Governor  Yates  was  a  candidate,  in 
1865,  Senator  Palmer  thought  that  he  should  have  been 
elected.  I  liked  Governor  Yates  and  believed  that  his  record 
as  Governor  entitled  him  to  a  seat  in  the  Senate.  Governor 
Palmer  complained  of  me  for  taking  any  active  part  in  the 
contest,  and  thought  that  as  I  was  a  member  of  Congress 
I  should  remain  neutral.  In  those  days  Governor  Palmer 
and  I  were  not  on  very  friendly  terms,  although  after  he 
came  to  the  Senate  we  became  quite  intimate.  He  had  a 
struggle  in  securing  his  election  as  Senator.  It  was  a  long 
contest,  but  he  was  finally  successful. 

General  Palmer  was  very  popular  with  his  colleagues  in 
the  Senate.  He  was  one  of  the  best  raconteurs  in  the  Senate, 
and  he  delighted  to  sit  in  the  smoking-room,  or  in  his  com 
mittee  room,  entertaining  those  about  him  with  droll  stories. 
During  his  term  he  made  some  very  able  speeches,  and  was 
always  sound  on  the  money  question.  He  was  consistently 
in  harmony  with  President  Cleveland,  and  consequently  he 
controlled  the  patronage  in  the  State.  He  was  a  man  of 
great  good  heart,  full  of  generosity  and  good  humor;  and 
altogether  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  have  a  more 
agreeable  colleague. 

We  had  been  neighbors  in  Springfield,  and  when  General 
Palmer  was  elected  to  the  Senate,  he  felt  quite  free  to  write 
to  me.  I  retain  the  letter  and  quote  it  here : 

"SPRINGFIELD,  March  14,  1891. 
"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM, 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 
"Mr  DEAR  SIR: — 

"I  am  just  in  receipt  of  your  kind  favor  of  the  eleventh  inst.,  and 
thank  you  for  its  friendly  and  neighborly  expressions.  More  than 
once  since  my  election,  Mrs.  Palmer  has  expressed  the  hope  that  when 
she  meets  Mrs.  Cullom  at  Washington,  or  here,  they  may  continue  to 


196     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

enjoy  the  friendly  relations  that  have  so  long  existed  between  them, 
to  which  I  add  the  expression  of  my  own  wish  that  in  the  future  as  in 
the  past,  we  may  be  to  each  other  good  neighbors  and  good  friends. 

"I  do  not  know  what  the  usage  is  in  such  cases,  but  I  suppose  I  might 
forward  my  credentials  at  an  early  day  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate, 
who  is,  I  believe,  my  old  army  friend,  Gen.  Anson  G.  McCook.  If 
such  is  the  proper  course  I  would  be  glad  to  do  so  through  you,  if 
agreeable  to  you.  I  will  depend  upon  you  also  for  such  information 
as  your  experience  will  enable  you  to  furnish  me.  I  will  be  glad  to 
know  about  what  time  you  will  probably  leave  Washington. 

"I  am,  very  respectfully, 

"JOHN  M.  PALMER." 

While  General  Sherman  and  General  Palmer  were  not 
particularly  friendly,  General  Palmer  was  always  ready  to 
forgive  and  forget  and  do  the  agreeable  thing. 

On  the  occasion  of  a  celebration  in  Springfield,  where 
there  was  a  very  large  crowd,  General  Sherman  was  present, 
and,  with  General  Oglesby  and  General  Palmer,  occupied  a 
seat  on  the  platform.  Looking  over  the  crowd,  General 
Palmer  recognized  General  McClernand  in  the  audience. 
McClernand  and  Sherman  were  not  friends,  McClernand 
being  bitterly  inimical  to  Sherman.  General  Palmer,  think 
ing  only  of  doing  an  agreeable  act,  at  once  pushed  his 
way  through  the  crowd  to  where  General  McClernand  was 
seated  and  invited  him  to  come  onto  the  platform.  It  was 
only  after  a  great  deal  of  urging  that  he  consented  to  go,  but 
he  finally  said,  "I  will  go,  pro  forma"  He  did  go  "pro 
forma,"  and  paid  his  respects  to  General  Sherman,  but  re 
mained  only  a  short  time. 

General  Palmer  retired  from  the  Senate  at  the  end  of  his 
term,  the  Legislature  of  Illinois  being  Republican. 

I  recollect  that  I  went  home  from  Washington  to  Spring 
field,  and  on  arriving  there  was  informed  that  General  Palmer 
had  just  died.  I  immediately  called  at  the  house.  He  had 


GENERAL  JOHN  M.  PALMER     197 

only  just  passed  away,  and  was  still  lying  on  his  death-bed. 
I  attended  the  funeral  at  his  old  home  in  Carlinville,  and  I 
do  not  know  that  I  was  ever  more  impressed  by  such  a  cere 
mony.  He  was  buried  with  all  the  pomp  attending  a  military 
funeral. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

GOVERNOR   RICHARD   J.    OGLESBY 

I  KNEW  the  late  Governor  Oglesby  intimately  for  very 
many  years.  As  a  young  man,  he  served  as  a  lieutenant 
in  the  gallant  Colonel  E.  D.  Baker's  regiment  in  the  Mexi 
can  War,  was  at  the  battle  of  Cerro  Gordo,  and  fought  all 
the  way  thence  to  the  City  of  Mexico.  He  remained  with  the 
army  until  he  saw  the  Stars  and  Stripes  waving  over  the  halls 
of  the  Montezumas.  Returning  to  Illinois,  he  took  up  again 
the  practice  of  law;  but  with  the  gold  fever  of  1849  he  took 
the  pioneers'  trail  to  California,  where,  in  a  short  time,  he 
was  financially  successful,  then  returned  home,  and  later  went 
on  an  extended  tour  through  the  Holy  Land,  where  he  re 
mained  nearly  two  years. 

On  his  return  home,  in  1860,  he  was  elected  to  the  State 
Senate.  I  recall  the  night  the  returns  came  in.  He  had  a 
fisticuff  encounter  with  "Cerro  Gordo"  Williams,  in  which 
he  came  out  victorious,  having  knocked  Williams  into  the 
gutter.  By  many  of  the  onlookers  this  was  regarded  as  the 
first  fight  of  the  Rebellion. 

With  his  military  experience  in  the  Mexican  War,  it  was 
only  natural  that  he  should  be  one  of  the  first  to  enlist  for 
service  in  the  Civil  War.  He  resigned  from  the  Senate, 
raised  a  regiment,  was  appointed  its  Colonel,  and  participated 
in  a  number  of  important  engagements  under  General 
Grant,  acquitting  himself  with  great  honor  at  Donelson, 
and  was  subsequently  appointed  a  Brigadier-General.  He 
was  severely  wounded  at  Corinth,  and  his  active  service  in 

198 


GOVERNOR  RICHARD  J.  OGLESBY      199 

the  Civil  War  was  over.  Although  he  was  elevated  to  the 
rank  of  Major-General,  he  was  assigned  to  duty  at  Washing 
ton,  where  he  remained  until  1864,  and  saw  no  more  service  on 
the  field  of  battle. 

He  enjoyed  the  distinction  of  being  elected  Governor  of 
Illinois  three  times,  first  in  1864,  again  in  1872,  resigning  the 
following  year,  after  having  been  elected  to  the  United  States 
Senate ;  and  after  he  had  served  one  term  in  the  Senate  and 
retired  to  private  life,  he  was  again  elected  Governor  of  Illi 
nois  in  1884. 

Governor  Oglesby  was  a  remarkable  man  in  many  re 
spects.  Judged  by  the  standards  of  Lincoln  and  Grant,  he 
was  not  a  great  man.  In  some  respects  he  was  a  man  of  far 
more  than  ordinary  ability.  He  was  a  wonderfully  eloquent 
speaker,  and  I  have  heard  him  on  occasions  move  audiences 
to  a  greater  extent  than  almost  any  orator,  aside  from  the 
late  Robert  G.  Ingersoll. 

I  have  already  referred,  in  these  reminiscences,  to  the 
speech  he  delivered  at  the  Philadelphia  Convention  of  1872. 
He  produced  a  greater  impression  on  that  assemblage  than 
any  orator  who  spoke.  On  rare  occasions  he  would  utter 
some  of  the  most  beautiful  sentiments.  For  instance,  his 
speech  on  "Corn"  at  Chicago  was  a  masterpiece  in  its  way. 
But  generally  speaking,  with  all  his  eloquence,  he  seldom  de 
livered  a  speech  that  would  read  well  in  print;  hence  it  was 
that  his  speeches  were  hardly  ever  reported.  His  earnestness, 
his  appearance,  his  gestures,  his  personality,  all  carried  the 
audience  with  him,  as  much  as,  if  not  more,  than  the  actual 
words  he  used,  and  hence  it  was  that  when  a  speech  appeared 
in  print,  one  was  very  apt  to  be  disappointed. 

His  record  in  the  Civil  War  was  honorable,  but  not  excep 
tional.  He  was  not  the  dashing,  brilliant  soldier  that  General 
Logan  was,  and  I  may  remark  here  in  passing  that  after  the 


200     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

war  was  over  there  was  considerable  jealousy  between  Gen 
eral  Logan  and  General  Oglesby.  They  were  rivals  in  poli 
tics.  On  one  occasion  both  Governor  Oglesby  and  General 
Logan  made  each  a  splendid  address,  and  each  was  cheered  to 
the  echo  by  the  audience,  but  Governor  Oglesby  sat  silent  and 
glowering  when  the  audience  applauded  General  Logan,  and 
General  Logan  occupied  the  same  attitude  when  the  audience 
cheered  Governor  Oglesby.  I  was  present,  and  was  glad  to 
cheer  them  both. 

Under  the  administration  of  General  Oglesby,  as  Gov 
ernor,  the  affairs  of  the  State  were  administered  in  an 
honest,  businesslike  manner.  There  was  no  scandal  or 
thought  of  scandal,  so  far  as  the  Executive  was  concerned, 
during  all  the  years  that  he  was  Governor,  although  there 
was  considerable  corruption  in  one  or  two  of  the  Legisla 
tures,  and  some  very  bad  measures  were  passed  over  his 
veto. 

Having  been  a  Major- General  in  the  Civil  War,  and  con 
sidering  his  excellent  record  as  Governor,  his  popularity,  his 
eloquence,  it  seemed  certain  that  Governor  Oglesby  would 
take  his  place  as  one  of  the  foremost  United  States  Senators, 
when  he  entered  the  Senate  in  1873;  but  strange  to  say,  his 
service  in  that  body  added  nothing  to  the  reputation  he  had 
made  as  a  soldier  and  as  Governor  of  Illinois ;  indeed,  I  am 
not  sure  but  that  it  detracted  from  rather  than  added  to  his 
reputation.  Perhaps  too  much  was  expected  of  him.  The 
environment  did  not  suit  him.  His  style  of  oratory  was 
neither  appreciated  nor  appropriate  to  a  calm,  deliberative 
body  such  as  the  United  States  Senate.  He  did  not  have  the 
faculty  of  disposing  of  business.  As  Chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Pensions,  he  was  so  conscientious  that  he  wanted  to 
examine  every  little  detail  of  the  hundreds  of  cases  before  his 
committee,  and  would  not  trust  even  the  routine  to  his  sub- 


RICHARD    J.  OGLESBY 


GOVERNOR  RICHARD  J.  OGLESBY      201 

ordinates.     The  result  was  the  business  of  the  committee  was 
far  behind,  much  to  the  dissatisfaction  of  Senators. 

I  do  not  believe  that  Governor  Oglesby  ever  did  feel  at 
home  in  the  Senate ;  but  nevertheless  he  was  much  chagrined 
at  his  defeat,  and  retired  reluctantly. 

But  he  was  soon  again  elected  Governor  of  Illinois,  a  place 
that  suited  him  much  better  than  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States. 

His  honesty,  his  patriotism,  his  earnest  eloquence,  the 
uniqueness  of  his  character,  made  him  beloved  by  the  people 
of  his  State;  and  wherever  he  went,  to  the  day  of  his  death, 
Uncle  Dick  Oglesby,  as  he  was  called,  was  enthusiastically 
and  affectionately  received. 

He  was  a  true  Republican  from  the  very  beginning  of  the 
party,  although  toward  the  end  of  his  life  I  do  not  believe 
that  he  was  quite  satisfied  with  the  expansion  policy  of  the 
party. 

The  last  campaign  in  which  he  took  an  active  part  was  that 
of  1896.  Owing  to  his  advanced  years  and  failing  health, 
and  perhaps  being  somewhat  dissatisfied  with  our  candidate 
for  Governor,  it  took  considerable  urging  to  induce  him 
to  enter  that  campaign  actively;  but  when  it  was  arranged 
that  all  the  living  ex-Governors  of  Illinois  —  Oglesby,  Bev- 
eridge,  Fif  er,  Hamilton,  and  myself  -  -  should  tour  the  State 
on  a  special  train,  he  consented  to  join,  and  christened  the  ex 
pedition,  "The  Flying  Squadron."  He  did  his  full  part  in 
speaking,  and  seemed  to  enjoy  keenly  the  enthusiasm  with 
which  he  was  everywhere  received.  He  was  particularly 
bitter  in  his  denunciation  of  Mr.  Bryan  —  even  to  the  extent 
of  using  profanity  (to  which  he  was  much  addicted) ,  greatly 
to  the  delight  of  the  thousands  of  people  whom  he  addressed. 

Governor  Oglesby  was  one  of  the  most  delightfully  enter 
taining  conversationalists  whom  one  would  wish  to  meet.  He 


202     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

will  go  down  in  the  history  of  Illinois,  as  one  of  the  most 
popular  men  among  the  people  of  our  State. 

Late  in  life  Governor  Oglesby  took  up  a  church  affiliation. 
It  always  seemed  strange  to  me,  in  his  later  life,  that  a  man 
of  his  undoubted  bravery  should  have  such  a  perfect  horror 
of  death,  which  was  an  obsession  with  him.  To  his  intimate 
friends  he  constantly  talked  of  it.  It  was  not  the  physical 
pain  of  dying;  with  a  man  of  his  pronounced  religious  con 
victions  it  could  not  have  been  the  uncertainty  of  the  here 
after.  What  was  the  basis  of  the  fear  I  cannot  imagine  - 
but  certain  it  is,  I  do  not  remember  ever  knowing  a  man 
who  seemed  to  have  such  a  fear  of  death. 

At  an  advanced  age,  he  passed  away  peacefully  and  pain 
lessly  at  his  beautiful  home  at  Elkhart,  Illinois,  mourned  by 
the  people  of  the  whole  State,  whom  he  had  served  so  long 
and  faithfully  and  well. 


CHAPTER  XT 

SENATORIAL  CAREER 
1883  TO  1911 

AFTER  I  was  reflected  Governor  of  Illinois,  in  1880, 
my  friends  in  the  State  urged  me  to  become  a  candidate 
for  the  United  States  Senate  to  succeed  the  late  Hon.  David 
Davis,  whose  term  expired  March  3,  1883.  I  finally  con 
sented.  There  were  several  candidates  against  me,  Governor 
Richard  Oglesby  and  General  Thomas  J.  Henderson  being 
the  two  most  prominent.  It  was  not  much  of  a  contest,  and 
I  had  no  very  serious  struggle  to  secure  the  caucus  nomina 
tion.  The  objection  was  then  raised  in  the  Legislature  itself 
that  I  was  not  eligible  under  the  Constitution  of  our  State  for 
election  to  the  United  States  Senate  while  I  was  serving  as 
Governor  of  Illinois.  The  point  looked  somewhat  serious  to 
me,  and  I  consulted  with  my  friend,  the  Hon.  Wm.  J.  Cal- 
houn,  then  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  later  Minister  to 
China,  for  whose  ability  I  had  the  most  profound  respect. 
I  asked  him  to  give  attention  to  the  subject  and,  if  he 
agreed  with  me  that  I  was  eligible,  to  make  the  fight  on  the 
floor  of  the  House.  He  looked  into  it  and  came  to  the  con 
clusion  there  was  no  doubt  as  to  my  eligibility.  He  made  a 
speech  in  the  Legislature,  which  was  regarded  then  as  one 
of  the  ablest  efforts  ever  delivered  on  the  floor  of  the  House, 
and  he  carried  the  Legislature  with  him.  When  the  time 
came,  I  received  the  vote  of  every  Republican  member  of 
both  Houses,  excepting  one,  the  Hon.  Geo.  E.  Adams.  He 
was  thoroughly  conscientious  in  voting  against  me,  and  did 
so  from  no  ulterior  motive,  as  he  honestly  believed  that  I  was 

203 


204     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

not  eligible.  We  became  very  good  friends  afterwards,  and 
I  never  harbored  any  ill  feeling  against  him  on  account  of  that 
vote. 

I  appreciated  the  high  distinction  conferred  upon  me  by 
the  people  of  the  State,  through  the  Legislature,  in  electing 
me  to  the  United  States  Senate,  but  I  confess  that  I  felt  con 
siderable  regret  on  leaving  the  Governorship,  as  during  my 
six  years  I  had  enjoyed  the  work  and  had  endeavored  to  the 
best  of  my  ability  to  give  to  the  people  of  my  State  a  business 
like  administration. 

I  retired  from  the  office  of  Governor  on  February  5,  1883, 
and  remained  in  Springfield  until  sworn  in  as  a  member  of 
the  Senate,  December  4,  1883.  General  Arthur  was  Presi 
dent  at  that  time,  having  succeeded  to  the  office  after  the 
assassination  of  General  Garfield. 

I  liked  General  Arthur  very  much.  I  had  met  him  once 
or  twice  before.  I  went  with  my  staff  to  attend  the  York- 
town  celebration,  and  I  may  remark  here  that  it  was  the  first 
and  only  time  during  my  service  of  six  years  as  Governor 
on  which  my  whole  military  staff  accompanied  me.  We 
stopped  in  Washington  to  pay  our  respects  to  the  President. 
It  was  soon  after  the  assassination  of  General  Garfield,  and 
Arthur  had  not  yet  moved  into  the  White  House.  He  was 
living  in  the  old  Butler  place  just  south  of  the  Capitol,  and 
I  called  on  him  there  and  presented  the  members  of  my  staff 
to  him.  The  President  was  exceedingly  polite,  as  he  always 
was,  and  was  quite  interested,  having  been  a  staff  officer  him 
self,  by  appointment  of  Governor  Morgan  of  New  York. 
We  were  all  very  much  impressed  with  the  dignity  of  the 
occasion  and  the  kindly  attention  the  President  showed  us. 

General  Arthur  had  taken  considerable  interest  in  New 
York  politics  and  belonged  to  the  Conkling  faction.  He 
came  into  the  office  of  President  under  the  most  trying  cir- 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  205 

cumstances.  The  party  was  almost  torn  asunder  by  factional 
troubles  in  New  York  and  elsewhere.  Elaine,  the  bitter  en 
emy  of  Conkling,  had  been  made  the  Secretary  of  State; 
Garfield  had  made  some  appointments  very  obnoxious  to 
Conkling  —  among  them  the  Collector  of  the  Port  of  New 
York  —  and,  generally,  conditions  were  very  unsatisfactory. 
Arthur  entered  the  office  bent  on  restoring  harmonious  con 
ditions  in  the  party,  so  far  as  he  could.  He  did  not  allow  him 
self  to  be  controlled  by  any  faction,  but  seemed  animated  by 
one  desire,  and  that  was  to  give  a  good  administration  and 
unite  the  party. 

He  was  a  man  of  great  sense  of  propriety  and  dignity, 
believing  more  thoroughly  in  the  observance  of  the  etiquette 
which  should  surround  a  President  than  any  other  occupant 
of  the  White  House  whom  I  have  known.  He  was  very  pop 
ular  with  those  who  came  into  contact  with  him,  and  especially 
was  he  popular  with  the  members  of  the  House  and  Senate. 
I  have  always  thought  that  he  should  have  been  accorded  the 
honor  of  a  nomination  for  President  in  1884;  as  a  matter 
of  fact  most  of  the  Republican  Senators  agreed  with  me,  and 
many  of  us  went  to  the  National  Convention  at  Chicago, 
determined  to  nominate  him;  but  we  soon  found  there  was 
no  chance,  and  that  the  nomination  would  go  to  Elaine. 

President  Arthur  was  very  kind  to  me  in  the  way 
of  patronage.  He  not  only  recognized  my  endorsement  for 
Federal  offices  in  my  State,  but  gave  me  a  number  of  appoint 
ments  outside.  One  of  the  first  of  these  was  the  appointment 
of  Judge  Zane  as  Territorial  Judge  of  Utah.  President 
Arthur  showed  his  confidence  in  me  by  appointing  Judge 
Zane,  without  any  endorsement,  excepting  a  statement  of 
his  qualifications,  written  by  me  on  a  scrap  of  paper  in  the 
Executive  Office.  The  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 
called  on  the  President  for  the  endorsements  of  Judge  Zane, 


206     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  Senator  Edmunds  was  quite  disgusted  when  the  Presi 
dent  could  send  him  only  this  little  slip  of  paper  written  by 
me,  which  was  all  the  President  had  when  he  made  the  ap 
pointment.  Senator  Edmunds  hesitated  to  recommend  his 
confirmation.  There  was  no  question  about  Judge  Zane's 
qualifications.  He  had  been  a  circuit  judge  in  our  State  for 
many  years.  I  saw  Senator  Teller,  whom  I  knew,  and  who 
knew  something  of  Judge  Zane,  and  asked  him  to  help  me, 
as  he  could  do,  being  then  Secretary  of  the  Interior.  On 
one  occasion  I  spoke  to  Teller  about  Judge  Zane,  and  pur 
posely  spoke  so  loud  that  Senator  Edmunds  could  hear  me. 
I  said,  among  other  things,  there  had  not  been  a  man  nom 
inated  for  Territorial  Judge  in  the  country  who  was  better 
qualified  for  the  position.  Judge  Zane's  nomination  was 
soon  reported  from  the  committee  and  confirmed.  He  made 
a  great  record  on  the  Bench  and  did  much  to  break  up  the 
practice  of  polygamy.  He  is  still  living,  a  resident  of  Salt 
Lake  City,  Utah. 

I  entered  the  Senate  at  a  very  uninteresting  period  in  our 
history.  The  excitement  and  bitterness  caused  by  the  Civil 
War  and  Reconstruction  had  subsided.  It  was  what  I  would 
term  a  period  of  industrial  development,  and  there  were  no 
great  measures  before  Congress.  The  men  who  then  com 
posed  the  membership  of  the  Senate  were  honest  and  patri 
otic,  trying  to  do  their  duty  as  best  they  could,  but  there  was 
no  great  commanding  figure.  The  days  of  Webster,  Clay, 
and  Calhoun  had  passed;  the  great  men  of  the  Civil  War 
period  were  gone.  Stevens,  Sumner,  Chase  of  the  Recon 
struction  era,  had  all  passed  away. 

Among  the  leaders  at  the  beginning  of  the  Forty-eighth 
Congress  were  Senators  Aldrich  and  Anthony,  of  Rhode  Is 
land;  Edmunds  and  Morrill,  of  Vermont;  Sherman  and  Pen- 
dleton,  of  Ohio;  Sewell,  of  New  Jersey;  Don  Cameron,  of 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  207 

Pennsylvania ;  Platt  and  Hawley,  of  Connecticut ;  Harrison, 
of  Indiana;  Dawes  and  Hoar,  of  Massachusetts;  Allison,  of 
Iowa;  Ingalls,  of  Kansas;  Hale  and  Frye,  of  Maine;  Saw 
yer,  of  Wisconsin;  Van  Wyck  and  Manderson,  of  Nebraska; 
all  on  the  Republican  side.  There  were  a  number  of  quite 
prominent  Democrats  —  Bayard,  of  Delaware;  Voorhees,  of 
Indiana;  Morgan,  of  Alabama;  Ransom  and  Vance,  of  North 
Carolina;  Butler  and  Hampton,  of  South  Carolina;  Beck,  of 
Kentucky ;  Lamar  and  George,  of  Mississippi ;  and  Cockrell 
and  Vest,  of  Missouri. 

The  Senate  was  controlled  by  the  Republicans,  there  being 
forty  Republican  and  thirty-six  Democratic  Senators;  and 
Senator  George  F.  Edmunds,  of  Vermont,  was  chosen  Presi 
dent  pro  tempore.  In  the  House  the  Democrats  had  the 
majority,  and  John  G.  Carlisle  was  chosen  Speaker. 

Senator  Edmunds  is  still  living,  and  he  has  been  for 
many  years  regarded  as  one  of  the  foremost  lawyers  of 
the  American  bar.  I  know  that  in  the  Senate  when  I  entered 
it,  he  was  ranked  as  its  leading  lawyer.  He  was  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  of  the  Senate  and,  with 
Senator  Thurman,  of  Ohio,  dominated  that  committee.  I 
became  very  intimately  acquainted  with  him.  He  was  dig 
nified  in  his  conversation  and  deportment,  and  I  never  knew 
him  to  say  a  vicious  thing  in  debate. 

I  believe  I  had  considerable  influence  with  Senator  Ed 
munds.  He  always  seemed  to  have  a  prejudice  against  ap 
propriations  for  the  Rock  Island  (Illinois)  Arsenal.  He 
had  never  visited  Rock  Island,  but  he  seemed  to  think  that 
the  money  spent  there  was  more  or  less  wasted,  and  he  was 
disposed  to  oppose  appropriations  for  its  maintenance.  One 
day  we  were  considering  an  appropriation  bill  carrying  sev 
eral  items  in  favor  of  Rock  Island,  and  I  anticipated  Senator 
Edmunds'  objections.  Sitting  beside  him,  I  asked  him  not 


208     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

to  oppose  those  items.  I  told  him  that  I  did  not  think  he 
was  doing  right  by  such  a  course.  He  asked  me  where  they 
were  in  the  bill  and  I  showed  them  to  him  without  saying  a 
word.  Just  before  we  reached  them  I  observed  him  rising 
from  his  seat  and  leaving  the  chamber.  He  remained  away 
until  the  items  were  passed,  then  he  returned,  and  the  subject 
was  never  mentioned  between  us  afterwards. 

Senator  Edmunds  resigned  before  his  last  term  expired. 
There  were  two  reasons  for  his  resignation,  the  principal 
one  being  the  illness  of  his  only  daughter ;  but  in  addition,  he 
had  come  to  feel  that  the  Senate  was  becoming  less  and  less 
desirable  each  year,  and  began  to  lose  interest  in  it.  He  did 
not  like  the  rough-and-tumble  methods  of  debate  of  a  number 
of  Western  Senators  who  were  coming  to  take  a  more  prom 
inent  place  in  the  Senate.  On  one  occasion  Senator  Plumb, 
of  Kansas,  attacked  Senator  Edmunds  most  violently,  and 
without  any  particular  reason. 

During  his  service  in  the  Senate,  Senator  Edmunds  seemed 
to  be  frequently  arguing  cases  before  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States.  His  ability  as  a  lawyer  made  him  in 
constant  demand  in  important  litigation  before  that  court. 
Personally,  I  do  not  approve  of  Senators  of  the  United 
States  engaging  in  the  active  practice  of  the  law  or  any 
other  business,  but  his  practice  before  the  Supreme  Court  did 
not  cause  him  to  neglect  his  Senatorial  duties. 

Justice  Miller,  one  of  the  ablest  members  of  the  court,  was 
talking  with  me  one  day  about  Senator  Edmunds,  and  he 
asked  me  why  I  did  not  come  into  the  Supreme  Court  and 
practise,  remarking  that  Edmunds  was  there  a  good  deal.  I 
replied  that  I  did  not  know  enough  law,  to  begin  with ;  and  in 
addition  it  did  not  seem  to  me  proper  for  a  Senator  of  the 
United  States  to  engage  in  that  kind  of  business.  Justice 
Miller  replied  that  Senators  did  do  so,  and  that  there  seemed 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  209 

to  be  no  complaint  about  it,  and  he  urged  me  to  come  along, 
saying  he  would  take  care  of  me.  But  needless  for  me  to 
say,  I  never  appeared  in  any  case  before  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  during  my  service  as  Senator. 

Senator  Edmunds'  colleague,  Justin  S.  Morrill,  was  one 
of  the  most  lovable  characters  I  ever  met.  I  served  with 
him  in  the  House.  Later  he  was  a  very  prominent  mem 
ber  of  the  Senate,  when  I  entered  it,  and  was  Chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Finance.  He  was  a  wonderfully  capable 
man  in  legislation.  He  had  extraordinary  power  in  origi 
nating  measures  and  carrying  them  through.  He  was  not  a 
lawyer,  but  was  a  man  of  exceptional  common  sense.  His 
judgment  was  good  on  any  proposition.  I  do  not  believe 
he  had  an  enemy  in  the  Senate.  Every  one  felt  kindly  to 
ward  him,  and  for  this  reason  it  was  very  easy  for  him  to 
secure  the  passage  of  any  bill  he  was  interested  in. 

While  Senator  Morrill  was  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Finance,  owing  to  his  advanced  age  and  the  feeble  condition 
of  his  health  the  real  burden  of  the  committee  for  years  be 
fore  his  death  fell  on  Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  of  Rhode  Island. 
He  was  prominent  as  far  back  as  the  Forty-eighth  Congress, 
and  was  a  dominant  unit  even  then.  His  recent  retirement 
is  newspaper  history  and  need  not  be  aired  here. 

Senator  Aldrich  has  had  a  potent  influence  in  framing  all 
tariff  and  financial  legislation  almost  from  the  time  he  en 
tered  the  Senate.  Personally,  I  have  great  admiration  for 
him  and  for  his  great  ability  and  capacity  to  frame  legis 
lation,  and  it  is  a  matter  of  sincere  regret  with  me  that  he  has 
determined  to  retire  to  private  life.  His  absence  is  seriously 
felt,  especially  in  the  Finance  Committee. 

The  Hon.  John  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  was  one  of  the  most 
valuable  statesmen  of  his  day  and  one  of  the  ablest  men.  He 
was  exceedingly  industrious,  and  well  posted  on  all  financial 


210     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

questions.  Toward  the  close  of  his  Senatorial  term,  he  failed 
rapidly,  but  he  was  just  as  clear  on  any  financial  question  as 
he  was  at  any  time  in  his  career.  He  was  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  when  in  his  prime,  and  I  believe  his  record  in  this 
office  stands  second  only  to  Hamilton's.  He  was  of  the 
Hamilton  school  of  financiers,  and  his  judgment  was  always 
reliable  and  trustworthy.  He  was  a  very  serious  man  and 
could  never  see  through  a  joke.  He  was  one  of  the  very 
best  men  in  Ohio,  and  would  have  made  a  splendid  President. 
For  years  he  was  quite  ambitious  to  be  President,  and  the 
business  interests  of  the  country  seemed  to  be  for  him.  His 
name  was  before  the  National  Convention  of  the  Republican 
party  many  times,  but  circumstances  always  intervened  to 
prevent  his  nomination  when  it  was  almost  within  his  grasp. 

I  have  always  thought  that  one  reason  was  that  his  own 
State  had  so  many  ambitious  men  in  it  who  sought  the  honor 
themselves,  that  they  were  never  sincerely  in  good  faith  for 
Sherman.  At  least  twice  he  went  to  National  Conventions, 
apparently  with  his  own  State  behind  him,  but  he  was  un 
fortunate  in  the  selection  of  his  managers,  and,  really,  when 
the  time  came  to  support  him  they  seemed  only  too  ready  to 
sacrifice  him  in  their  own  interests. 

I  have  always  regretted  that  he  closed  his  career  by  ac 
cepting  the  office  of  Secretary  of  State  under  President  Mc- 
Kinley.  It  was  unfortunate  for  him  that  it  was  at  a  most 
trying  and  difficult  time  that  he  entered  that  department. 
The  Spanish-American  War  was  coming  on,  and  there 
was  necessity  for  exercising  the  most  careful  and  skil 
ful  diplomacy.  Senator  Sherman's  training  and  experience 
lay  along  other  lines.  He  was  not  in  any  sense  a  diplomat, 
and  his  age  unfitted  him  for  the  place.  He  retired  from 
office  very  soon,  and  shortly  thereafter  passed  away.  His 
brief  service  as  Secretary  of  State  will  be  forgotten,  and  he 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  211 

will  be  remembered  as  the  great  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
and  one  of  the  most  celebrated  of  Ohio  Senators. 

Senator  George  F.  Hoar,  of  Massachusetts,  was  quite 
prominent  at  the  beginning  of  the  Forty-eighth  Congress. 
He  was  jealous  of  New  England's  interests,  and  was  always 
prejudiced  in  its  favor,  and  in  favor  of  New  England  men 
and  men  with  New  England  ancestry,  or  affiliations.  He 
opposed  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act  because  he  thought  it 
would  injuriously  affect  his  locality,  although  he  knew  very 
well  it  would  be  of  inestimable  benefit  to  the  country  as  a 
whole.  Senator  Hoar  was  a  scholarly  man.  Indeed,  I 
would  say  he  was  the  most  cultivated  man  in  the  Senate.  He 
was  highly  educated,  had  travelled  extensively,  was  a  student 
all  his  life,  and  in  debate  was  very  fond  of  Latin  or  Greek 
quotations,  and  especially  so  when  he  wanted  to  make  a  point 
perfectly  clear  to  the  Senate.  He  opposed  imperialism  and 
the  acquisition  of  foreign  territory.  He  opposed  the  ratifi 
cation  of  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain.  When  the  Philip 
pine  question  was  up  in  the  Senate,  I  made  a  speech  in  which 
I  compared  Senator  Hoar  with  his  colleague,  Senator  Lodge, 
said  that  Senator  Lodge  had  no  such  fear  as  did  Senator 
Hoar  on  account  of  the  acquirement  of  non-contiguous  terri 
tory,  and  made  the  remark  that  Senator  Hoar  was  far  behind 
the  times.  He  was  not  present  when  I  made  the  speech,  but 
afterwards  read  it  in  the  Record.  He  came  down  to  my  seat 
greatly  out  of  humor  one  day  and  stated  that  if  three-fourths 
of  the  people  of  his  State  were  not  in  harmony  with  his  po 
sition  he  would  resign. 

He  was  one  of  the  most  kindly  of  men,  but  during  this 
period  he  was  so  deadly  in  earnest  in  opposition  to  the  so- 
called  imperialism  that  he  became  very  ill-natured  with  his 
Republican  colleagues  who  differed  from  him.  I  do  not 
know  but  that  the  passing  of  time  has  demonstrated  that 


212     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Senator  Hoar  was  right  in  his  opposition  to  acquirement  of 
the  Philippines;  but  at  the  time  it  seemed  that  the  burden 
was  thrust  upon  us  and  we  could  not  shirk  it. 

Senator  Hoar  was  disposed  to  be  against  the  recognition 
of  the  Republic  of  Panama,  and  it  has  been  intimated  that 
he  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  Roosevelt  Administration  had 
something  to  do  with  the  bloodless  revolution  that  resulted  in 
the  uniting  with  the  United  States  of  that  part  of  Colombia 
which  now  forms  the  Canal  Zone. 

President  Roosevelt  entertained  a  very  high  regard  for 
Senator  Hoar,  and  he  wanted  to  disabuse  his  mind  of  that 
impression.  He  asked  him  to  call  at  his  office  one  morning. 
I  was  waiting  to  see  the  President  and  when  he  came  in  he 
told  me  that  he  had  an  engagement  with  Senator  Hoar,  and 
asked  me  if  I  would  wait  until  he  had  seen  the  Senator  first. 
I  promptly  answered  that  he  should  see  the  Senator  first  at 
any  rate,  as  he  was  an  older  man  than  I,  and  was  older  in  the 
service.  Senator  Hoar  and  the  President  entered  the  room 
together.  Just  as  they  went  in,  the  President  turned  to  me. 
"You  might  as  well  come  in  at  the  same  time,"  said  he.  I 
accompanied  them.  And  this  is  what  took  place: 

The  President  wanted  the  Senator  to  read  a  message  which 
he  had  already  prepared,  in  reference  to  Colombia's  action  in 
rejecting  the  treaty  and  the  canal  in  general;  which  message 
showed  very  clearly  that  the  President  had  never  contem 
plated  the  secession  of  Panama,  and  was  considering  different 
methods  in  order  to  obtain  the  right  of  way  across  the  Isth 
mus  from  Colombia,  fully  expecting  to  deal  only  with  the 
Colombian  Government  on  the  subject.  The  President  was 
sitting  on  the  table,  first  at  one  side  of  Senator  Hoar,  and 
then  on  the  other,  talking  in  his  usual  vigorous  fashion,  try 
ing  to  get  the  Senator's  attention  to  the  message.  Sen 
ator  Hoar  seemed  adverse  to  reading  it,  but  finally  sat  down, 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  213 

and  without  seeming  to  pay  any  particular  attention  to  what 
he  was  perusing,  he  remained  for  a  minute  or  two,  then 
arose  and  said  {"I  hope  I  may  never  live  to  see  the  day  when 
the  interests  of  my  country  are  placed  above  its  honor."  He 
at  once  retired  from  the  room  without  uttering  another 
word,  proceeding  to  the  Capitol. 

Later  in  the  morning  he  came  to  me  with  a  typewritten 
paper  containing  the  conversation  between  the  President  and 
himself,  and  asked  me  to  certify  to  its  correctness.  I  took 
the  paper  and  read  it  over,  and  as  it  seemed  to  be  correct,  as 
I  remembered  the  conversation,  I  wrote  my  name  on  the  bot 
tom  of  it.  I  have  never  seen  or  heard  of  the  paper  since. 

Senator  Hoar  was  very  much  interested  in  changing  the 
date  of  the  inauguration  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States.  March,  in  Washington,  is  one  of  the  very  worst 
months  of  the  year,  and  it  frequently  happens  that  the 
weather  is  so  cold  and  stormy  as  to  make  any  demonstration 
almost  impossible.  Inaugurations  have  cost  the  lives  of 
very  many  men.  I  was  looking  into  the  subject  myself,  and 
I  took  occasion  to  write  Senator  Hoar  a  letter,  asking  his 
views.  He  replied  to  me  very  courteously  and  promptly. 
I  was  so  pleased  with  the  letter  that  I  retained  it,  and  give  it 
here. 

"WORCESTER,  MASS.,  August  26,  1901. 
"My  DEAR  SENATOR: — 

"I  do  not  think  the  proposed  change  of  time  of  inauguration  can  be 
made  without  change  in  the  Constitution.  I  prepared  an  article  for 
so  changing  the  Constitution.  It  has  passed  the  Senate  twice  cer 
tainly,  and  I  think  three  times.  It  was  reported  once  or  twice  from 
the  Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elections,  and  once  from  the  Com 
mittee  on  the  Judiciary.  It  received  general  favor  in  the  Senate,  and 
as  I  now  remember  there  was  no  vote  against  it  at  any  time.  The  only 
serious  question  was  whether  the  four  years  should  terminate  on  a  cer 
tain  Wednesday  in  April  or  should  terminate  as  now  on  a  fixed  day  of 


214     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  month.  The  former  is  liable  to  the  objection  that  one  Presidential 
term  should  be  in  some  cases  slightly  longer  than  another.  The  other 
is  liable  to  the  objection  that  if  the  thirtieth  of  April  were  Sunday  or  Sat 
urday  or  Monday,  nearly  all  persons  from  a  distance  who  come  to  the 
inauguration  would  have  to  be  away  from  home  over  Sunday. 

"The  matter  would,  I  think,  have  passed  the  House,  if  it  could  have 
been  reached  for  action.  But  it  had  the  earnest  opposition  of  Speaker 
Reed.  It  was,  as  you  know,  very  hard  to  get  him  to  approve  anything 
that  was  a  change. 

"I  have  prepared  an  amendment  to  be  introduced  at  the  beginning  of 
the  next  session,  and  have  got  some  very  carefully  prepared  tables 
from  the  Coast  Survey,  to  show  the  exact  length  of  an  administra 
tion  under  the  different  plans.  The  advantage  of  the  change  seems  to 
me  very  clear  indeed.  In  the  first  place,  you  prolong  the  second  session 
of  Congress  until  the  last  of  April;  you  add  six  or  seven  weeks,  which 
are  very  much  needed,  to  that  session.  And  you  can  further  increase 
that  session  a  little  by  special  statute,  which  should  have  Congress  meet 
immediately  after  the  November  election,  a  little  earlier  than  now.  In 
that  case,  you  can  probably  without  disadvantage  shorten  the  first  ses 
sion  of  Congress  so  as  to  get  away  by  the  middle  of  May  or  the  first 
of  June  and  get  rid  of  the  very  disagreeable  Washington  heat. 

"I  wish  you  would  throw  your  great  influence,  so  much  increased  by 

the   renewed   expression   of  the  confidence  of  your   State,   against  what 

seems  to  me  the  most  dangerous  single  proposition  now  pending  before 

the  people,  a  plan  to  elect  Senators  of  the  United  States  by  popular  vote. 

"I  am,  with  high  regard,  faithfully  yours, 

"Gso.  F.  HOAR. 
"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM, 

CHICAGO,  ILLS." 

Senator  Dawes,  of  Massachusetts,  Senator  Hoar's  col 
league,  was  not  the  cultivated  man  that  Senator  Hoar  was, 
and  neither  would  I  say  he  was  a  man  of  strong  and  inde 
pendent  character.  He  was  very  popular  in  the  Senate, 
probably  far  more  popular  with  Senators  than  his  colleague, 
and  it  was  much  easier  for  him  to  pass  bills  in  which  he  was 
interested.  He  was  influential  as  a  legislator  and  a  man  of 
great  probity  of  character. 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  215 

For  some  reason  or  other  —  why,  I  never  knew  —  he  was 
one  of  the  very  few  Eastern  Senators  of  my  time  who  gave 
special  attention  to  Indian  affairs.  He  was  chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Indian  Affairs  for  years,  and  was  the  ac 
knowledged  authority  on  that  subject  in  the  Senate.  When 
he  retired  he  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  so-called  Dawes 
Commission,  having  in  charge  the  interests  of  the  tribes  of 
Indians  in  Oklahoma  and  the  Indian  Territory.  He  was  an 
honest  man,  and  having  inherited  no  fortune,  he  conse 
quently  retired  from  the  Senate  a  poor  man.  The  appoint 
ment  was  very  agreeable  to  him  on  that  account,  but  it  was 
given  to  him  more  especially  because  he  knew  more  about 
Indian  matters  than  any  other  man. 

As  I  have  been  writing  these  recollections  of  the  men  with 
whom  I  have  been  associated  in  public  life  for  the  last  half- 
century,  I  have  had  occasion  to  mention  a  number  of  times, 
Senator  Orville  H.  Platt,  of  Connecticut,  who  was  two  years 
older  than  I,  and  who  took  his  seat  in  the  Senate  in  1879, 
serving  there  until  his  death  in  1905. 

We  became  very  friendly  almost  immediately  after  I  en 
tered  the  Senate.  One  bond  of  friendship  between  us  from 
the  beginning  was,  we  each  had  as  senior  colleague  a  cele 
brated  General  of  Civil  War  fame  —  Hawley,  of  Connecti 
cut  and  Logan,  of  Illinois.  Senator  Platt  and  I  necessarily 
were  compelled  to  take  what  might  be  termed  a  back  seat, 
our  colleagues  being  almost  always  in  the  lime-light.  As  & 
member  of  the  select  committee  on  Interstate  Commerce, 
Senator  Platt  rendered  much  valuable  assistance  in  the  in 
vestigation  and  in  the  passage  of  the  Act  of  1887,  although 
he  was  almost  induced  finally  to  oppose  it  on  account  of  the 
anti-pooling  and  the  long-and-short-haul  sections. 

He  was  a  modest  man,  and  it  was  some  years  before  Sen 
ators  that  were  not  intimate  with  him  really  appreciated  his 


216     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

worth.  Had  he  not  yielded  to  the  late  Senator  Hoar,  he 
would  have  been  made  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary  instead  of  Senator  Hoar,  a  position  for  which 
there  was  no  Senator  more  thoroughly  qualified  than  Sena 
tor  Platt.  It  seems  strange  that  he  never  did  succeed  to  an 
important  chairmanship  until  he  was  made  chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Cuban  Relations  during  the  war  with  Spain, 
and  he  really  made  that  an  important  committee.  Not  only 
in  name  but  in  fact  was  he  the  author  of  those  very  wise 
pieces  of  legislation  known  as  the  Platt  Amendments.  I 
was  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Cuban  Relations,  and 
know  whereof  I  speak  in  saying  that  it  was  Senator  Platt 
who  drafted  these  so-called  amendments  and  secured  their 
passage  in  the  Senate.  They  were  finally  embodied  in  the 
Cuban  Constitution,  and  also  in  the  treaty  between  Cuba 
and  the  United  States. 

After  the  late  Senator  Dawes  retired,  Senator  Platt 
was  an  authority  on  all  matters  pertaining  to  Indian  af 
fairs. 

As  the  years  passed  by  he  became  more  and  more  influen 
tial  in  the  Senate.  Every  Senator  on  both  sides  of  the  cham 
ber  had  confidence  in  him  and  in  his  judgment.  As  an 
orator  he  was  not  to  be  compared  with  Senator  Spooner,  but 
he  did  deliver  some  very  able  speeches,  especially  during  the 
debates  preceding  the  Spanish- American  War. 

I  have  often  said  that  Senator  Platt  was  capable  in  more 
ways  than  any  other  man  in  the  Senate  of  doing  what  the 
exigencies  of  the  day  from  time  to  time  put  upon  him.  He 
was  always  at  his  post  of  duty,  always  watchful  in  caring  for 
the  interests  of  the  country,  always  just  and  fair  to  all  alike, 
and  ever  careful  and  conservative  in  determining  what  his 
duty  should  be  in  the  disposition  of  any  public  question ;  and 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  217 

I  regarded  his  judgment  as  a  little  more  exactly  right  than 
that  of  any  other  Senator. 

General  Joseph  R.  Hawley,  of  Connecticut,  was  quite  a 
figure  in  the  Senate  when  I  entered  it,  and  was  regarded  as 
one  of  the  leaders,  especially  on  military  matters.  He  was 
a  man  of  fine  ability  and  address,  brave  as  a  lion  and  en 
joyed  an  enviable  Civil  War  record.  He  was  president  of 
the  Centennial  at  Philadelphia  and  permanent  President  of 
the  Republican  Convention  of  1868,  which  nominated  Gen 
eral  Grant.  He  was  a  very  ambitious  man,  and  wanted  to 
be  President;  several  times  the  delegation  from  his  State 
presented  his  name  to  national  conventions.  He  had  no 
mean  idea  of  his  own  merits;  and  his  colleague,  Senator 
Platt,  told  me  once  in  a  jocular  way  that  if  the  Queen  of 
England  should  announce  her  purpose  of  giving  a  banquet 
to  one  of  the  most  distinguished  citizens  from  each  nation, 
and  General  Hawley  should  be  invited  as  the  most  dis 
tinguished  citizen  of  the  United  States,  he  would  take  it  as  a 
matter  of  course. 

Senator  F.  M.  Cockrell  and  Senator  George  Vest  repre 
sented  Missouri  in  the  United  States  Senate  for  very  many 
years. 

Senator  Cockrell  was  one  of  the  most  faithful  and  useful 
legislators  I  ever  knew.  I  served  with  him  for  years  on  the 
Committee  on  Appropriations.  That  committee  never  had 
a  better  member.  He  kept  close  track  of  the  business  of  the 
Senate,  and  when  the  calendar  was  called,  no  measure  was 
passed  without  his  close  scrutiny,  especially  any  measure  car 
rying  an  appropriation.  He  was  a  Democrat  all  his  life, 
but  never  allowed  partisanship  to  enter  into  his  action  on  leg 
islation.  It  was  said  of  him  that  he  used  to  make  one  fiery 
Democratic  speech  at  each  Congress,  and  then  not  think  of 


218     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

partisanship  again.  He  was  not  given  much  to  talking 
about  violating  the  Constitution,  because  he  knew  he  had 
been  in  the  Confederate  Army  himself  and  that  he  had  vio 
lated  it. 

One  day  Senator  George,  who  was,  by  the  way,  a  very  able 
Senator  from  the  South,  was  making  a  long  constitutional 
argument  against  a  bill,  extending  over  two  or  three  days. 
I  happened  to  be  conversing  with  Cockrell  at  the  time,  and 
he  remarked:  "Just  listen  to  George  talk.  He  don't  seem 
to  realize  that  for  four  years  he  was  violating  the  Constitu 
tion  himself."  Senator  Cockrell  retired  from  the  Senate 
in  1905,  his  State  for  the  first  time  in  its  history  having 
elected  a  Republican  Legislature. 

President  Roosevelt  had  the  very  highest  regard  for  him, 
and  as  soon  as  it  was  known  he  could  not  be  reelected,  he 
wired  Senator  Cockrell,  tendering  him  a  place  on  either  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  or  the  Panama  Canal 
Commission.  He  accepted  the  former,  serving  thereon  for 
one  term.  He  gave  the  duties  of  this  position  the  same  atten 
tion  and  study  that  he  did  when  a  member  of  the  Senate. 

Senator  Vest  was  an  entirely  different  style  of  man.  He 
did  not  pay  the  close  attention  to  the  routine  work  of  the 
Senate  that  Senator  Cockrell  did,  but  he  was  honest  and 
faithful  to  his  duty,  and  an  able  man  as  well.  He  was  a 
great  orator,  and  I  have  heard  him  make  on  occasions  as 
beautiful  speeches  as  were  ever  delivered  in  the  Senate.  At 
the  time  of  his  death  he  was  the  last  surviving  member  of  the 
Confederate  Senate. 

He  told  me  a  rather  interesting  story  once  about  how  he 
came  to  quit  drinking  whiskey.  He  said  he  came  home  to 
Missouri  after  the  war,  found  little  to  do,  and  being  almost 
without  means,  took  to  drinking  whiskey  pretty  hard.  He 
awoke  one  night  and  thought  he  saw  a  cat  sitting  on  the 


GROVER  CLEVELAND 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  219 

end  of  his  bed.  I._j  reached  down,  took  up  his  boot- jack 
and  threw  it  at  the  cat,  as  he  supposed.  Instead,  a  pitcher 
was  smashed  to  atoms.  Needless  to  add  there  was  no  cat 
at  all,  which  he  realized,  and  he  never  took  another  drink  of 
liquor. 

Senator  Vest  was  not  a  very  old  man,  but  he  was  in  poor 
health  and  feeble  for  his  years.  One  day  he  looked  partic 
ularly  forlorn,  sitting  at  his  desk  and  leaning  his  head  on 
his  hands.  I  noticed  his  dejected  attitude,  and  said  to  Sen 
ator  Morrill,  who  was  then  eighty-five  or  eighty-six  years 
old:  "Go  over  and  cheer  up  Vest."  Morrill  did  so  in  these 
words:  "Vest,  what  is  the  matter?  Cheer  up!  Why,  you 
are  nothing  but  a  boy." 

Senator  Vest  retired  from  the  Senate,  and  shortly  there 
after  died  in  his  home  in  Washington. 

Allen  G.  Thurman,  of  Ohio,  was  another  very  prominent 
Democrat  in  this  Congress.  He  was  one  of  the  leading 
lawyers  of  the  Senate,  ranking,  probably,  with  Edmunds  in 
this  respect.  He  was  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary  for  a  brief  period,  was  later  nominated  for  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States,  but  was  defeated  with  the 
rest  of  the  Democratic  ticket. 

Senator  Eugene  Hale,  who  retired  from  the  Senate  on  his 
own  motion,  March  4,  1911,  was  elected  in  1881,  and  was 
always  regarded  as  a  very  strong  man.  It  was  unfortunate 
for  the  Senate  and  country  that  Senator  Hale  determined 
to  leave  this  body.  He  was  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations,  and  chairman  of  the  Republican  caucus,  in 
which  latter  capacity  I  succeeded  him  in  April,  1911.  He 
was  for  years  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Naval  Af 
fairs;  and  there  is  no  man  in  the  country,  in  my  judgment, 
who  knows  more  about  the  work  and  condition  of  the  Navy 
and  the  Navy  Department  than  does  Senator  Hale.  Hence 


•J-.'O     FIFTY  YKAKS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

it  lias  been  for  years  past,  that  when  legislation  afl'ecting  \\\c 
Naw  came  up  to  be  acted  upon  by  Congress,  generally  we 
have  looked  to  Senator  Hale  to  direct  and  influence  our 
legislative  action. 

He  is  a  very  independent  character,  and  was  just  the  man 
for  chairman  of  the  great  Committee  on  Appropriations. 
Senator  Hale  was  -more  than  ordinarily  independent,  even 
to  the  extent  of  voting  against  his  party  at  times,  and  was 
very  little  influenced  by  what  a  President  or  an  Administra 
tion  might  desire.  1  regretted  exceedingly  to  see  him  lra\r 
the  Senate,  where  for  many  years  he  served  liis  country  so 
well. 

Charles  F.  Manderson,  of  Nebraska,  was  twice  elected  to 
the  United  States  Senate,  and  was  an  influential  member. 
I  have  regarded  him  as  one  of  the  most  amiable  men  with 
whom  I  have  served.  He  was  a  splendid  soldier,  a  splendid 
legislator,  and  a  splendid  man  generally.  He  was  the  pre 
siding  officer  of  the  Senate,  and  a  good  one.  I  have  always 
thought  that  he  ought  to  have  been  the  Republican  nominee 
for  Vice-President  of  the  United  States;  but  for  some  reason 
or  other  he  never  seemed  to  seek  the  place,  and  finally  he  be 
came  one  of  the  attorneys  for  the  Chicago,  Burlington,  and 
Quincy  Railroad,  since  when  he  seems  to  have  lost  interest  in 
political  affairs.  He  visits  old  friends  in  Washington  once 
each  year,  and  it  is  always  a  great  pleasure  for  me  to  greet 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Manderson. 

Another  Senator  who  first  served  many  years  in  the 
House,  was  Philetus  Sawyer,  of  Wisconsin.  It  was  in  the 
Senate  that  I  served  with  him,  and  came  to  have  for  him  a 
very  great  respect.  He  was  not  very  well  educated,  not  a 
lawyer  nor  an  orator,  and  excepting  in  a  conversational  way, 
not  regarded  as  a  talker;  yet  he  wras  an  uncommonly  ef 
fective  man  in  business  as  well  as  in  politics,  and  was  once 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  221 

or  twice  invited  to  become  chairman  of  the  National  Repub 
lican  Committee. 

I  cannot  resist  the  temptation  to  tell  a  little  story  in  con 
nection  with  Senator  Sawyer.  One  day  he  was  undertaking 
to  pass  an  unimportant  bill  in  the  Senate  concerning  some 
railroad  in  his  own  State,  and  as  was  his  custom  when  he  had 
anything  to  say  or  do  in  the  Senate,  he  took  his  place  in  the 
centre  aisle  down  close  to  the  clerk's  desk,  so  that  he  could  be 
heard.  Senator  Van  Wyck  offered  an  amendment  to  the 
bill,  and  was  talking  in  favor  of  the  amendment,  when  Saw 
yer  became  a  little  alarmed  lest  the  bill  was  going  to  be 
beaten.  He  turned  his  back  to  the  clerk,  and  said  in  a 
tone  of  voice  that  could  be  distinctly  heard : 

"If  you  will  stop  your  damned  yawp  I  will  accept  your 
amendment." 

Van  Wyck  merely  said,  "All  right."  The  amendment 
was  adopted,  and  the  bill  passed. 

As  is  quite  the  custom  in  the  disposal  of  new  members,  I 
was  appointed  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Pensions  - 
really  the  only  important  committee  appointment  I  received 
during  my  first  sendee  in  the  Senate.  I  naturally  felt  very 
liberal  toward  the  old  soldiers,  and  it  seemed  that  every  case 
that  was  referred  to  me  was  a  worthy  one,  and  that  a  liberal 
pension  should  be  allowed.  I  became  a  little  uneasy  lest  I 
might  be  too  liberal,  and  I  went  to  Sawyer,  knowing  that  he 
was  a  man  of  large  wealth,  seeking  his  advice  about  it. 

He  said,  and  I  have  been  guided  by  that  advice  largely 
ever  since :  "You  need  not  worry ;  you  cannot  very  well  make 
a  mistake  in  allowing  liberal  pensions  to  the  soldier  boys. 
The  money  will  get  into  circulation  and  come  back  into  the 
treasury  very  soon;  so  go  ahead  and  do  what  you  think  is 
right  in  the  premises,  and  there  will  be  no  trouble." 

Senator  Sawver  retired  from  the  Senate  voluntarilv  at  a 


222     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

ripe  old  age.  He  was  largely  instrumental  in  selecting  as 
his  successor,  one  of  the  greatest  lawyers  and  ablest  states 
men  who  has  ever  served  in  that  body,  of  whom  I  shall  speak 
later,  my  distinguished  friend,  the  Hon.  John  C.  Spooner. 

In  the  Forty-eighth  Congress  the  Democrats  had  a  ma 
jority  in  the  House  and  the  Republicans  a  majority  in  the 
Senate,  and  as  is  always  the  case  when  such  a  situation  pre 
vails,  little  or  no  important  legislation  was  enacted. 

I  entered  the  Senate  having  three  objects  in  view:  first, 
the  control  of  Interstate  Commerce;  second,  the  stamping 
out  of  polygamy;  third,  the  construction  of  the  Hennepin 
Canal. 

I  was  not  quite  as  modest  as  I  have  since  advised  younger 
Senators  to  be,  because  I  see  by  the  Record  that  on  January 
11,  1884,  a  little  more  than  a  month  after  I  had  entered  the 
Senate,  I  made  an  extended  address  on  the  subject  of  Ter 
ritorial  Government  for  Utah,  particularly  referring  to  po 
lygamy.  I  was  especially  bitter  in  what  I  said  against 
the  Mormons  and  the  Mormon  Church.  I  used  such  expres 
sions  as  these : 

"There  is  scarcely  a  page  of  their  history  that  is  not  marred  by  a 
recital  of  some  foul  deed.  The  whole  history  of  the  Mormon  Church 
abounds  in  illustrations  of  the  selfishness,  deceit,  and  lawlessness  of  its 
leaders  and  members.  Founded  in  fraud,  built  up  by  the  most  audacious 
deception,  this  organization  has  been  so  notoriously  corrupt  and  im 
moral  in  its  practices,  teachings,  and  tendencies  as  to  justify  the  Gov 
ernment  in  assuming  absolute  control  of  the  Territory  and  in  giving 
the  Church  or  its  followers  no  voice  in  the  administration  of  public 
affairs.  The  progress  of  Mormonism  to  its  present  strength  and  power 
has  been  attended  by  a  continual  series  of  murders,  robberies,  and  out 
rages  of  every  description;  but  there  is  one  dark  spot  in  its  disgraceful 
record  that  can  never  be  effaced,  one  crime  so  heinous  that  the  blood 
of  the  betrayed  victims  still  calls  aloud  for  vengeance." 


SENATORIAL  CAREER  223 

I  introduced  a  bill  on  the  subject,  in  which  I  provided  for 
the  appointment  of  a  legislative  council  by  the  President,  this 
council  to  have  the  same  legislative  power  as  the  legislative 
assembly  of  a  Territory.  I  distrusted  the  local  Legislature 
because  it  was  dominated  by  men  high  up  in  the  Mormon 
Church. 

During  this  Congress  I  pushed  the  bill  as  best  I  could,  but 
was  never  able  to  secure  its  passage.  Laws  were  passed  on 
the  subject,  and  the  Mormon  question  is  practically  now  a 
thing  of  the  past. 

Since  that  time  conditions  in  Utah  and  in  the  Mormon 
Church  have  changed  greatly.  The  Prophets  received  a  new 
revelation  declaring  polygamy  unlawful,  and  I  believe  that 
the  practice  has  ceased.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Judge  Zane, 
the  Territorial  Judge  in  Utah,  did  more  to  stamp  it  out  than 
any  other  one  man.  He  sentenced  those  guilty  of  the  prac 
tice  to  terms  in  the  penitentiary,  and  announced  that  he  would 
continue  to  do  so  until  they  reformed.  I  do  not  think  that 
the  Church  or  the  Mormon  people  deserve  to-day  the  se 
vere  criticism  they  merited  twenty-five  years  ago. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM 
1884  TO  1887 

THE  Republican  Convention  of  1884  was  held  at  Chi 
cago.  The  names  of  Joseph  R.  Hawley,  John  A. 
Logan,  Chester  A.  Arthur,  John  Sherman,  George  F. 
Edmunds,  and  James  G.  Blaine  were  presented  as  candi 
dates  for  the  Republican  nomination  for  President  of  the 
United  States.  Blaine  and  Logan  finally  were  the  nominees, 
neither  of  them  having  much  of  a  contest  to  secure  the  nom 
ination  for  President  and  Vice-President  respectively. 

The  Democratic  Convention  met  later,  and  nominated 
Grover  Cleveland  and  Thomas  A.  Hendricks. 

The  Presidential  campaign  of  1884  was  unique  in  the 
extreme.  It  was  the  most  bitter  personal  contest  in  our  his 
tory.  The  private  lives  of  both  candidates,  Cleveland  and 
Blaine,  were  searched,  and  the  most  scandalous  stories  cir 
culated,  most  of  which  were  false. 

The  tide  was  in  favor  of  Blaine  only  a  short  time  before 
the  election.  I  do  not  intend  to  go  into  the  cause  of  his 
defeat.  It  was  accomplished  by  a  margin  so  narrow  that 
any  one  of  a  dozen  reasons  may  be  given  as  the  particular 
one.  The  Burchard  incident,  the  dinner  given  by  the  plu 
tocrats  at  Delmonico's,  certainly  changed  several  hundred 
votes  —  important  when  we  remember  that  a  change  of  less 
than  six  hundred  votes  in  the  State  of  New  York  would 
have  elected  him.  Conkling,  too,  was  accused  of  playing 

224 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  225 

him  false,  and  it  was  alleged  there  were  hundreds  of  frau 
dulent  votes  cast  in  the  city  of  New  York  and  on  Long 
Island.  Colonel  A.  K.  McClure,  in  "Our  Presidents  and 
How  We  Make  Them,"  says,  with  reference  to  this  contest : 

"Blaine  would  have  been  matchless  in  the  skilful  management  of  a 
Presidential  campaign  for  another,  but  he  was  dwarfed  by  the  over 
whelming  responsibilities  of  conducting  a  campaign  for  himself,  and  yet 
he  assumed  the  supreme  control  of  the  struggle  and  directed  it  abso 
lutely  from  start  to  finish.  He  was  of  the  heroic  mould,  and  he  wisely 
planned  his  campaign  tours  to  accomplish  the  best  result.  In  point  of 
fact,  he  had  won  his  fight  after  stumping  the  country,  and  lost  it  by 
his  stay  in  New  York  on  his  way  home.  He  knew  how  to  sway  multi 
tudes,  and  none  could  approach  him  in  that  important  feature  of  a  con 
flict;  but  he  was  not  trained  to  consider  the  thousand  intricacies  that 
fell  upon  the  management  of  every  Presidential  contest." 

Grover  Cleveland  was  inaugurated  on  the  fourth  of 
March,  1885,  being  the  first  Democratic  President  since 
James  Buchanan,  who  was  elected  in  1856,  and  marking  the 
first  defeat  of  the  Republican  party  since  the  election  of 
Lincoln. 

(There  was  a  wild  scramble  for  offices  on  the  part  of  the 
Democrats  as  soon  as  Cleveland  was  inaugurated.  He  pro 
ceeded  to  satisfy  them  as  rapidly  as  he  could,  and  out  of  56,- 
134  Presidential  positions  he  appointed  42,992  Democrats. 

I  always  admired  Grover  Cleveland.  I  first  saw  him  at 
the  time  of  his  inaugural  address,  which  he  delivered  with 
out  notes.  He  never  faltered  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end,  never  skipped  a  line  or  missed  a  word,  or  made  a  false 
start.  He  was  the  first,  and  so  far  as  I  know  the  only  Pres 
ident  who  did  not  read  his  inaugural  address.  His  speeches, 
his  messages,  and  his  public  utterances  generally  all  showed 
that  he  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  ability.  He  made  a 
wonderful  impression  upon  the  country.  As  Chief  Exec 
utive,  he  was  strong-minded  and  forceful,  and  adhered  to 


226     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

his  views  on  public  questions  with  a  remarkable  degree  of 
tenacity,  utterly  regardless  of  his  party. 

He  appointed  a  very  fair  cabinet.  There  was  really  no 
great  man  in  it,  but  they  were  all  men  of  some  ability.  His 
Secretary  of  State,  Thos.  F.  Bayard,  of  Delaware,  was  one 
of  the  prominent  Democrats  of  the  Senate  when  I  entered 
it,  and  had  represented  his  State  in  that  body  for  many 
years.  I  believe  he  conducted  the  affairs  of  the  State  De 
partment  satisfactorily,  and  he  was  later  made  Minister  to 
the  Court  of  St.  James. 

Daniel  Manning,  of  New  York,  was  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.  And,  referring  to  Manning,  I  am  reminded  of  a 
little  story. 

Soon  after  he  came  into  the  office  I  had  occasion  to  go  to 
the  Treasury  Department  on  some  business.  I  saw  the  of 
fice  secretary,  who  had  been  there  under  the  previous  Admin 
istration,  and  whom  I  knew  well.  He  informed  me  that  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  not  in,  but  that  he  would  be 
in  a  few  minutes.  I  expressed  a  desire  to  see  him  and  said 
that  I  would  like  very  much  to  be  introduced  to  him.  Mr. 
Manning  came  in  presently,  and  I  was  introduced,  after 
which  I  disposed  of  my  business  without  delay.  Looking 
around,  I  saw  Senator  Beck  and  a  number  of  other  Sena 
tors,  accompanied  by  a  horde  of  Democratic  office-seekers 
from  the  South,  sitting  against  the  wall  waiting  for  me  to 
get  through  with  my  business.  Beck  came  forward,  and  in 
a  half  serious  sort  of  way  said  to  me:  "You  do  not  seem  to 
know  that  the  Administration  has  changed.  You  march  in 
here  and  take  possession,  and  we  Democrats  are  sitting  here 
against  the  wall  cooling  our  heels  and  waiting  for  an  op 
portunity  to  see  the  Secretary.  You  have  seen  him  already, 
and  are  ready  to  go."  It  did  plague  me  a  little,  as  I  was 
not  quite  sure  whether  Beck  was  in  earnest  or  not.  He  soon 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  227 

returned  to  the  Senate  from  the  Treasury,  and  coming  into 
the  Senate  Chamber  a  little  later  I  found  that  he  had  been 
telling  my  colleagues  how  he  had  "plagued  Cullom"  and 
how  Cullom  was  much  embarrassed  about  it.  He  considered 
it  quite  a  joke  on  me. 

L.  Q.  C.  Lamar,  of  Mississippi,  was  made  Secretary  of 
the  Interior.  Lamar  was  also  one  of  the  prominent  Dem 
ocrats  of  the  Senate  when  I  entered  it.  I  had  the  very 
greatest  respect  for  him  as  a  Senator  and  as  a  man.  Later, 
Mr.  Cleveland  nominated  him  for  Associate  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court.  The  nomination  pended  before  the  Ju 
diciary  Committee  for  a  long  time,  as  it  was  well  known 
that  Mr.  Lamar  had  not  been  an  active,  practising  lawyer. 

I  happened  to  be  at  the  White  House  one  day,  and  Mr. 
Cleveland  said  to  me:  "I  wish  you  would  take  up  Lamar's 
nomination  and  dispose  of  it.  I  am  between  hay  and  grass 
with  reference  to  the  Interior  Department.  Nothing  is  be 
ing  done  there ;  I  ought  to  have  some  one  on  duty,  and  I  can 
not  do  anything  until  you  dispose  of  Lamar." 

He  had,  I  suppose,  spoken  to  other  Senators  along  the 
same  line.  The  nomination  was  taken  up  soon  after,  and 
he  was  confirmed.  I  voted  against  his  confirmation  in  the 
Senate;  not  because  I  had  anything  against  him  personally, 
or  because  he  was  a  Southern  Democrat,  but  I  understood 
that  he  had  not  practised  law  at  all,  and  I  did  not  believe  that 
sort  of  man  should  be  appointed  to  fill  so  high  and  responsi 
ble  a  position. 

Generally  speaking,  I  got  along  very  well  with  President 
Cleveland,  considering  the  fact  that  he  was  a  Democrat  and 
I  a  Republican.  I  visited  the  White  House  frequently,  and 
he  generally  granted  anything  that  I  asked  for. 

He  was  keenly  interested  in  the  passage  of  the  first  In 
terstate  Commerce  Act.  It  became  a  law  under  his  adminis- 


228     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tration,  and  although  the  Democrats  supported  it,  it  suc 
ceeded  mainly  through  the  influence  of  Republican  Sena 
tors  and  a  Republican  Senate.  When  the  bill  went  to  the 
President,  anol  while  he  had  it  under  consideration,  he  sent 
for  me  to  explain  one  or  two  sections  which  he  did  not  un 
derstand.  I  called  one  night  about  nine  o'clock  and  found 
him  surrounded  by  a  multitude  of  papers,  hard  at  work 
reading  the  bill.  I  explained  the  sections  concerning  which 
he  was  in  doubt  as  best  I  could,  and  he  said:  "I  will  approve 
the  bill." 

I  immediately  took  advantage  of  the  occasion  to  say: 
"Now,  Mr.  President,  I  might  just  as  well  take  this  oppor 
tunity  to  talk  with  you  with  reference  to  the  appointment 
of  a  Commission.  A  Republican  Senate  has  passed  this 
bill,  and  as  I  had  charge  of  it  in  the  Senate,  I  think  you 
ought  to  permit  me  to  recommend  the  appointment  of  one 
commissioner."  He  agreed  to  this,  asking  me  to  present 
the  name  of  some  Republican  whom  I  desired  appointed. 

Afterward  there  were  complications  with  the  members  of 
his  own  party  in  Congress,  and  he  sent  for  me  to  tell  me  that 
Colonel  Morrison,  of  Illinois,  had  been  recommended  by  the 
whole  "Free  Trade  Party,"  as  he  called  it,  and  that  he  did 
not  see  how  he  was  going  to  avoid  appointing  him.  I  sug 
gested  that  he  give  Morrison  something  else.  He  under 
took  to  do  so;  but  Morrison,  true  to  his  independent  nature, 
declined  to  accept  anything  else,  declaring  that  he  would 
like  to  have  the  office  of  commissioner,  and  if  he  could  not 
have  that  he  would  accept  nothing. 

The  President  sent  for  me  again,  and  told  me  he  could 
not  satisfy  Morrison,  and  he  did  not  know  how  he  was  going 
to  solve  the  complication.  I  said,  in  effect,  that  I  had 
been  Governor  of  a  State  and  I  knew  sometimes  that  an 
executive  officer  had  to  do  things  he  did  not  expect  to  do, 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  229 

and  did  not  desire  to  do,  but  that  he  had  to  yield  to  party 
pressure.  I  ceased  insisting  upon  an  appointment,  and 
allowed  Morrison  to  be  named.  At  the  same  time  I  was 
a  little  provoked  and  out  of  patience  and  I  added:  "Colo 
nel  Morrison  knows  nothing  about  the  subject  whatever.  If 
you  are  going  to  appoint  broken-down  politicians  who  have 
been  defeated  at  home,  as  a  sort  of  salve  for  the  sores  caused 
by  their  defeat,  we  might  as  well  repeal  the  law." 

I  inquired  of  him:  "Who  else  are  you  going  to  appoint 
on  that  Commission? "  I  had  previously  recommended 
Judge  Cooley. 

"I  will  appoint  Cooley,"  proposed  the  President. 

"Will  Cooley  take  it?  "  I  asked;  to  which  he  replied,  "I 
will  offer  any  place  on  the  Commission  he  desires,  and  will 
telegraph  him  at  once." 

I  expressed  my  satisfaction  with  this  arrangement.  He 
did  telegraph  Judge  Cooley,  who  accepted,  and  was  the 
first  and  most  distinguished  chairman  of  the  Interstate  Com 
merce  Commission. 

The  Forty-ninth  Congress  assembled  on  December  7, 
1885,  with  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  Vice-President,  presiding 
in  the  Senate,  John  Sherman  having  been  elected  President 
pro  tempore.  The  Senate  wras  still  in  the  control  of  the 
Republicans  by  a  majority  of  five.  The  Democrats  had  a 
majority  of  something  like  forty  in  the  House,  and  elected 
John  G.  Carlisle  Speaker.  This  is  practically  the  same 
situation  that  had  prevailed  during  the  previous  Congress, 
except  this  time  the  Democrats,  in  addition  to  a  majority, 
had  the  Chief  Executive  as  well.  But  they  were  just  as 
powerless  to  enact  legislation  as  they  had  been  before. 

Senators  Evarts,  of  New  York;  Spooner,  of  Wisconsin; 
Teller,  of  Colorado;  Stanford,  of  California;  Gray,  of  Del 
aware;  Brown,  of  Georgia;  Blackburn,  of  Kentucky;  and 


230     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Walthall,  of  Mississippi,  were  a  few  of  the  prominent  men 
who  entered  the  Senate  at  the  beginning  of  the  Cleveland 
Administration. 

Senator  Evarts  was  recognized  for  many  years  as  the 
leader  of  the  American  Bar.  lie  was  not  only  a  profound 
lawyer,  but  one  of  the  greatest  public  speakers  of  his  day. 
I  remember  him  as  a  good  natured,  agreeable  man,  who  was 
preeminently  capable  of  filling  the  highest  places  in  public 
life.  He  was  Attorney-General  under  President  Johnson, 
Secretary  of  State  under  President  Hayes,  and  counsel  rep 
resenting  the  United  States  before  many  great  international 
tribunals.  He  defended  President  Johnson  in  his  impeach 
ment  proceedings,  and  I  remember  yet  his  lofty  eloquence 
on  that  memorable  occasion.  He  did  not  accomplish  much 
as  a  Senator,  but  he  did  take  an  active  part  where  a  legal  or 
constitutional  question  came  before  the  Senate. 

Illustrating  how  great  lawyers  are  as  apt  to  be  wrong  on 
a  legal  question  as  the  lesser  legal  lights,  Senator  Evarts  ex 
pressed  the  opinion  that  Congress  did  not  possess  the  con 
stitutional  power  to  pass  the  Act  of  1887  to  regulate  com 
merce.  He  contended  in  the  debate  that  the  act  was  a  re 
striction  and  not  a  regulation  of  commerce,  and  consequently 
was  beyond  the  power  of  Congress.  The  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States  very  soon  afterwards  sustained  the  con 
stitutionality  of  the  act. 

Before  his  term  expired  he  became  partially  blind,  and  the 
story  is  told  by  the  late  Senator  Hoar  that  Senator  Evarts 
and  he  had  delivered  speeches  in  the  Senate  on  some  great 
legal,  constitutional  question,  Senator  Hoar  on  one  side, 
Senator  Evarts  on  the  other.  The  latter  asked  Senator 
Hoar  to  look  over  the  proof  of  his  speech  and  correct  it,  and 
in  reading  over  the  proof  Senator  Hoar  told  me  that  he  be- 


JAMES   A.  GARFIELD 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  231 

came  convinced  that  his  position  was  wrong  and  that  Evarts 
was  right. 

I  do  not  know  of  a  Democrat  with  whom  I  have  served 
in  the  Senate  for  whom  I  have  greater  respect  than  George 
Gray,  of  Delaware.  We  became  quite  intimate  and  were 
paired  all  during  his  service.  He  was  one  of  the  few  Sen 
ators  that  every  Senator  on  both  sides  believed  in  and  was 
willing  to  trust.  Indeed,  our  country  would  not  suffer  if 
he  were  elected  President  of  the  United  States.  He  has 
held  many  important  positions, —  Senator,  member  of  the 
Paris  Peace  Commission,  United  States  Circuit  Judge,  mem 
ber  of  many  arbitration  commissions, —  in  all  of  which  he 
acquitted  himself  with  great  honor. 

My  friend,  Senator  Henry  M.  Teller,  of  Colorado,  re 
turned  to  the  Seriate  at  the  beginning  of  this  Congress.  He 
had  previously  served  in  the  Senate,  and  resigned  to  accept 
a  Cabinet  position  under  President  Arthur.  Senator  Teller 
has  had  a  long  and  honorable  public  career.  He  was  elected 
to  the  Senate  several  times  as  a  Republican,  and  appointed  to 
the  office  of  Secretary  of  the  Interior  as  a  Republican.  He 
continued  this  affiliation  until  the  silver  agitation,  in  1896, 
when  he  regarded  himself  as  being  justified  in  leaving  the 
party,  and  was  twice  elected  afterward  to  the  Senate  by  the 
Legislature  of  his  State,  and  during  this  last  term  I  be 
lieve  he  became  a  pretty  strong  Democrat;  yet  he  never  al 
lowed  partisanship  to  enter  into  his  action  on  legislation, 
excepting  where  a  party  issue  was  involved,  when  he  would 
vote  with  his  party. 

I  served  with  him  on  the  Appropriations  Committee  and 
other  committees  of  the  Senate,  and  regarded  him  as  one  of 
the  best  Senators  for  committee  service  with  whom  I  was 
ever  associated.  The  friendly  relations  between  Senator 


232     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Teller  and  myself  have  been  very  close  and  intimate  since  I 
first  knew  him,  and  I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  fact  that  he 
left  the  Republican  party  has  not  disturbed  them  in  the 
least. 

Mr.  Teller's  withdrawal  from  the  Republican  party  after 
its  declaration  for  the  Gold  Standard  in  the  St.  Louis  Con 
vention  of  1896  was  due  to  his  abiding  conviction  in  support 
of  the  principles  of  bimetallism.  He  had  been  a  member  of 
the  party  almost  since  its  organization,  and  up  to  '96,  al 
though  independent  upon  many  points  at  issue,  had  been 
regarded  as  one  of  the  party's  stanchest  and  most  reliable 
adherents.  The  severance  of  the  ties  of  a  lifetime  could  not 
be  made  without  producing  a  visible  effect  upon  a  man  of 
Mr.  Teller's  fine  sensibilities,  but  I  was  pleased  to  observe 
that  he  did  not  allow  the  incident  to  change  his  personal 
relations.  He  continued  as  a  member  of  the  Senate  for 
twelve  or  thirteen  years  after  he  left  the  Republican  party, 
and  I  am  sure  that  he  did  not  lose  the  respect  or  personal 
regard  of  a  single  Republican  member  of  the  body.  Per 
sonally,  I  regarded  him  just  as  warmly  as  a  Democrat  as  I 
had  esteemed  him  as  a  Republican,  and  I  am  sure  that  my 
attitude  toward  him  was  reflected  by  his  attitude  toward  my 
self. 

The  Colorado  Senator's  nature  is  such  that  he  cannot  dis 
semble,  and  when  his  conviction  led  him  to  condemn  the 
Republican  party  because  of  its  position  on  the  money  ques 
tion,  he  could  not  find  it  in  his  conscience  to  remain  in  that 
party.  Time  has  shown  that  he  was  mistaken  as  to  the 
results  that  might  follow  the  adoption  of  the  gold  standard, 
but  it  has  not  served  to  alter  the  character  of  the  man.  He 
will  stand  for  what  he  believes  to  be  right,  whatever  the  con 
sequences  to  himself.  As  a  legislator,  he  was  faithful  m  his 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  233 

work  in  committee  and  in  the  Senate.  No  man  was  more 
constant  in  his  attendance,  and  none  gave  more  conscientious 
attention  to  the  problems  of  legislation.  An  unusually 
strong  lawyer  and  a  man  given  to  studious  research,  he  never 
failed  to  strengthen  any  cause  which  he  espoused  nor  to 
throw  light  upon  any  subject  which  came  within  his  range  of 
vision.  With  the  exception  of  three  years  spent  as  Secre 
tary  of  the  Interior  he  was  a  member  of  the  Senate  from 
1876,  the  year  of  Colorado's  admission  to  the  Union,  until 
1909,  during  which  time  he  had  nine  different  colleagues 
from  his  own  State, 

Mr.  Teller  was  a  resident  of  Illinois  before  he  removed 
to  Colorado  in  1861,  and  was  one  of  the  earliest  supporters 
of  Mr.  Lincoln.  His  father  and  mother  remained  in  Illinois 
as  long  as  they  lived,  and  Senator  Teller  always  has  retained 
interests  in  that  State.  I  think  he  still  has  relatives  residing 
in  Whiteside  County. 

William  Eaton  Chandler,  of  New  Hampshire,  was  one  of 
the  first  government  officials  with  whom  I  became  acquainted 
when  I  came  to  Washington,  in  1865,  as  a  member  of  the 
House  of  Representatives.  He  was  Assistant  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury.  We  became  quite  intimate  and  our  relations 
ever  since  have  been  the  most  cordial  and  friendly. 

Senator  Chandler  is  a  man  of  wonderfully  acute  intellect. 
For  many  years  he  served  his  people  in  the  Legislature  of 
New  Hampshire  and  was  a  member  of  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  for  several  terms.  After  he  retired  from  the 
Senate  in  1901,  President  McKinley  appointed  him  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Spanish  Claims  Commission.  In  the  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  that  office  he  manifested  the  same  high  con 
ception  of  his  trust  as  in  every  position  he  occupied,  either 
elective  or  appointive,  and  I  think  he  saved  to  the  govern- 


234     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

merit  of  the  United  States  many  millions  of  dollars  in  the 
adjudication  of  claims  growing  out  of  the  Spanish- Ameri 
can  War. 

While  Senator  Chandler  is  very  combative  in  his  attitude 
towards  others,  yet  his  innate  sincerity  draws  one  close  to  him 
after  becoming  acquainted  with  him.  A  little  incident, 
which  will  illustrate  this  trait,  occurred  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  some  years  ago.  Mr.  Chandler  was  induced 
to  believe  that  the  late  Senator  Proctor,  of  Vermont,  did  not 
like  him  very  much.  So  Chandler  went  up  to  Proctor  and 
said:  "Proctor,  don't  you  like  me?  "  Proctor  in  his  coarse, 
gruff  voice  replied:  "I  have  acquired  a  liking  for  you." 
He  established  the  point  without  circumlocution  or  diplo 
macy. 

As  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce 
of  the  Senate,  I  objected  to  the  appointment  of  Chandler  as 
a  member  of  that  committee.  I  did  not  believe  he  would  be 
very  attentive.  It  turned  out  that  I  was  mistaken  and  I 
often  wished  that  he  would  stay  away  from  the  meetings, 
because  he  was  always  stirring  up  some  new  question  that 
involved  the  time  of  the  committee.  He  was  inspired,  how 
ever,  by  the  highest  motive,  recognizing  as  he  did  that  the 
control  of  the  railroads  of  the  country  was  a  matter  of  su 
preme  importance  to  the  people  of  the  United  States.  He 
rendered  valuable  service  on  the  committee  in  the  enactment 
of  legislation  on  this  important  subject. 

Senator  Leland  Stanford,  of  California,  was  a  man  of 
large  wealth,  and  became  famous  on  account  of  his  having 
built  the  Central  Pacific  Railroad.  He  was  a  man  of  wide 
business  experience  and  made  a  valuable  Senator.  He  died 
as  a  member  of  the  Senate,  and  his  wife  founded  Leland 
Stanford  Jr.  University. 

Senator  Stanford's  colleague,   Senator  Hearst,  who  en- 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  235 

tered  the  Senate  two  years  after  Senator  Stanford,  was  also 
a  man  of  very  large  wealth  and  the  possessor  of  an  inter 
esting  character.  Concerning  him  many  amusing  stories  are 
told.  He  gave  an  elaborate  dinner  one  evening,  which  I 
attended.  There  were  twenty-five  of  us  present  with  our 
wives,  and  after  dinner  was  over  the  men  went  down  to  the 
smoking-room.  Senator  Hearst  had  thought  out  a  little 
speech  to  make  to  us,  in  which  he  said:  "I  do  not  know 
much  about  books;  I  have  not  read  very  much;  but  I  have 
travelled  a  good  deal  and  observed  men  and  things,  and  I 
have  made  up  my  mind  after  all  my  experience  that  the 
members  of  the  Senate  are  the  survival  of  the  fittest." 
Senator  Hearst  died  while  serving  as  a  member  of  the 
Senate. 

Matthew  Stanley  Quay  was  a  conspicuous  figure  in  our 
political  history.  He  had  been  a  soldier  in  the  Civil  War 
and  afterwards  occupied  many  positions  of  importance  in 
civil  affairs  in  his  State.  Few  men  in  American  political 
life  have  had  so  constant  a  struggle  as  did  Senator  Quay 
to  retain  his  ascendancy  in  Republican  politics  in  Pennsyl 
vania.  Quay  in  Pennsylvania,  and  T.  C.  Platt  in  New  York, 
were  regarded  as  two  of  the  greatest  political  bosses  in  the 
country.  In  national  convention  after  national  convention 
they  exercised  a  paramount  influence  over  the  nominations 
of  Presidents,  and  the  two  usually  worked  together.  Their 
political  methods  were  about  the  same.  Quay  was  the  bigger 
man  of  the  two;  but  it  must  be  said,  in  justice  to  both  of 
them,  that  the  word  of  either  was  as  good  as  his  bond.  Sen 
ator  Quay  was  returned  to  the  Senate  after  a  desperate 
struggle.  I  was  glad  to  see  him  return,  but  saddened  to  see 
that  he  was  sorely  afflicted  with  a  disease  that  finally  proved 
fatal.  Senator  Quay  and  Senator  Platt  have  both  passed 
away.  They  were  the  two  last  survivors  of  that  old  coterie 


236     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

of  politicians  who  so  long  dominated  Republican  national 
conventions. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  Cleveland  Administration,  a  va 
cancy  occurred  in  the  office  of  Chief  Justice  of  the  United 
States,  to  fill  which  President  Cleveland  appointed  the  Hon. 
Melville  W.  Fuller,  of  Illinois.  I  had  something  to  do  with 
this  appointment. 

Chief  Justice  Fuller  has  only  recently  passed  away,  after 
serving  as  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  for  a  longer 
period  than  any  of  his  predecessors  in  that  high  office,  with 
the  two  exceptions  of  Marshall  and  Taney.  I  knew  Mel 
ville  W.  Fuller  for  many  years  before  he  became  Chief  Jus 
tice.  Away  back  in  war  times,  I  knew  him  as  a  member  of 
the  Illinois  Legislature  and  as  a  member  of  the  Constitu 
tional  Convention,  and  subsequently  as  one  of  the  leading 
lawyers  of  the  Chicago  Bar. 

President  Cleveland  was  in  a  considerable  quandary  over 
the  appointment  of  a  Chief  Justice.  He  wanted  to  bestow 
the  seat  upon  an  able  lawyer,  and  he  wanted  a  Democrat; 
but  as  the  Senate  was  in  control  of  the  Republicans  he  wanted 
to  make  sure  to  name  some  one  whom  the  Senate  wrould  con 
firm.  He  at  first  seriously  considered  Judge  Phelps,  of 
Vermont,  a  cultivated  and  able  man,  who  had  been  Minister 
to  England,  but  for  some  reason  or  other  —  why  I  never 
knew  —  he  finally  rejected  Phelps  as  an  available  candidate 
and  determined  upon  a  Western  man  as  Chief  Justice. 

Prior  to  this,  however,  he  had  considered  the  appointment 
of  Justice  Scholfield,  of  our  own  State,  who  was  then  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Illinois,  which  never  had  an 
abler  or  better  lawyer  as  a  member  of  its  personnel.  He 
would  have  been  given  the  honor  had  he  signified  a  willing 
ness  to  accept;  but  when  he  was  approached  by  Representa 
tive  Townsend,  at  the  suggestion  of  President  Cleveland, 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  237 

after  considering  the  matter,  he  demurred,  asserting  that  al 
though  he  would  enjoy  the  distinction  of  being  Chief  Jus 
tice  of  the  United  States,  he  did  not  think  the  life  in  Wash 
ington,  and  especially  the  social  side  of  the  life  which  the 
Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  naturally  is  expected  to 
lead,  would  suit  either  him  or  his  family.  He  had  a  family 
of  growing  children  who  had  been  raised  in  the  country, 
and  they  would  naturally  have  to  accompany  him  to  Wash 
ington.  He  feared  that  Washington  life  would  ruin  them, 
so  he  finally  declined  the  appointment. 

Judge  Fuller  had  been  a  close  friend  of  President  Cleve 
land,  had  been  a  member  of  the  national  convention  that 
nominated  him,  was  recognized  as  one  of  the  leading  Demo 
crats  of  Illinois,  and  had  been  consulted  by  Mr.  Cleveland 
in  the  distribution  of  the  patronage  in  that  State;  so  natu 
rally  Judge  Fuller  was  considered  in  connection  with  the 
office.  It  was  not  surprising,  considering  that  the  Senate 
was  then  in  the  control  of  the  Republicans,  that  he  would 
want  to  enlist  my  aid  in  securing  his  confirmation. 

I  called  on  Mr.  Cleveland  about  nine  o'clock  one  morning 
in  regard  to  some  personal  matter.  He  at  once  sent  out  word 
for  me  to  come  in,  that  he  wanted  to  see  me.  I  apologized 
for  appearing  at  so  early  an  hour,  whereupon  he  said  that 
he  was  very  glad  that  I  had  come  because  he  desired  to  have 
a  talk  with  me.  Then  he  inquired  whom  I  considered  the 
best  lawyer,  belonging  to  his  party,  in  Illinois,  who  would 
make  a  good  Chief  Justice.  He  at  once  himself  mentioned 
Judge  Fuller.  I  told  him  that  Judge  Gowdy  was  probably 
the  ablest  Democratic  lawyer  in  Illinois,  but  that  he  was  a 
railroad  attorney,  and  it  would  probably  not  be  a  good  thing 
to  appoint  him.  He  next  questioned  me  particularly  about 
Fuller.  I  told  him  that  I  knew  Fuller  very  well  indeed; 
that  if  I  were  called  upon  to  name  five  of  the  best  lawyers 


238     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

of  Illinois  belonging  to  his  party,  I  would  name  Fuller 
among  the  five;  that  he  was  not  only  a  good  lawyer,  but  a 
scholarly  man,  a  gentleman  who  would  grace  the  position. 
He  at  once  intimated  that  he  would  send  his  name  to  the 
Senate. 

I  said  to  him:  "Mr.  President,  the  selection  of  a  Chief 
Justice  is  one  of  the  greatest  duties  you  have  to  perform. 
You  can  make  a  mistake ;  we  can  raise  the  devil  in  Congress ; 
but  with  a  capable  Supreme  Court  standing  steady  and  firm, 
doing  its  full  duty,  the  country  is  safe." 

He  agreed  with  me;  and  very  soon  thereafter  Melville  W. 
Fuller  was  nominated  as  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States. 

But  this  was  only  the  prelude  to  the  real  struggle.  The 
nomination  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 
of  which  Senator  Edmunds,  of  Vermont,  was  chairman. 
The  latter  was  very  much  out  of  humor  with  the  President 
because  he  had  fully  expected  that  Judge  Phelps,  of  his 
own  State,  was  to  receive  the  honor,  and  he  did  not  take  it 
kindly  that  the  appointment  should  go  to  Illinois.  He  had 
told  me  himself,  in  confidence,  that  he  had  every  assurance 
that  Judge  Phelps  was  to  be  nominated. 

The  result  was  that  Senator  Edmunds  held  the  nomina 
tion,  without  any  action,  in  the  Judiciary  Committee  for 
some  three  months,  as  I  now  recollect.  Finally  there  began 
to  be  more  or  less  scandal  hinted  at  and  suggestions  of 
something  wrong,  and  so  forth;  which  I  considered  so  en 
tirely  uncalled  for  and  unfair  to  Judge  Fuller  that  I  ap 
peared  before  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  Senate  and 
asked  that  the  nomination  be  reported  favorably  if  possible, 
unfavorably  if  the  committee  so  determined;  and  if  the 
committee  was  not  disposed  to  report  the  nomination  either 
favorably  or  unfavorably  that  they  report  the  nomination 
to  the  Senate  without  recommendation,  so  that  the  Senate 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  239 

itself  might  have  an  opportunity  to  act  upon  it.  The  latter 
action  was  taken,  and  the  nomination  was  laid  naked  before 
the  Senate.  The  matter  was  considered  in  executive  session. 
Senator  Edmunds  at  once  took  the  floor  and  attacked  Judge 
Fuller  most  viciously  as  having  sympathized  with  the  Re 
bellion,  together  with  much  to  the  same  effect. 

In  the  meantime  some  one  had  sent  to  me  a  printed  copy 
of  a  speech  which  Judge  Phelps  had  delivered  during  the 
war,  attacking  Mr.  Lincoln  in  the  most  outrageous  and 
undignified  fashion.  When  I  read  that  speech  I  then  and 
there  determined  that  Judge  Phelps  would  never  be  con 
firmed  as  Chief  Justice,  even  though  the  President  might 
send  his  nomination  to  the  Senate.  I  put  the  speech  in  my 
desk,  determining  that  if  I  ever  had  a  good  chance  I  would 
read  it  to  the  Senate,  at  the  same  time  pointing  out  that  the 
only  objection  which  Senator  Edmunds  opposed  to  Judge 
Fuller  was  his  pique  because  Phelps  had  not  received  the  ap 
pointment.  Edmunds'  attack  on  Judge  Fuller  gave  me  the 
opportunity,  and  I  read  the  speech  of  Judge  Phelps  to  the 
Senate,  much  to  the  chagrin  and  mortification  of  Senator 
Edmunds. 

The  Democrats  in  the  Senate  enjoyed  the  controversy  be 
tween  Senator  Edmunds  and  myself;  Senator  Voorhees  was 
particularly  amused,  laughing  heartily  all  through  it.  Nat 
urally,  it  appeared  to  them  a  very  funny  performance,  two 
Republicans  quarrelling  over  the  confirmation  of  a  Democrat. 
They  sat  silent,  however,  and  took  no  part  at  all  in  the  debate, 
leaving  us  Republicans  to  settle  it  among  ourselves.  The 
vote  was  taken  and  Judge  Fuller  was  confirmed  by  a  substan 
tial  majority. 

Judge  Fuller  was  very  grateful  to  me  for  what  I  had 
done  in  behalf  of  his  confirmation,  and  afterwards  he  wrote 
me  a  letter  of  thanks : 


240     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"CHICAGO.  July  21,  1888. 
MY  DEAR  SENATOR: — 

"I  cannot  refrain  from  expressing  to  you  my  intense  appreciation  at 
the  vigorous  way  in  which  you  secured  my  confirmation.  I  use  the 
word  'vigorous*  because,  though  it  was  more  than  that,  that  was  the 
quality  that  struck  me  most  forcibly  when  I  saw  the  newspapers  this 
morning.  When  we  meet,  as  I  hope  we  will  soon,  I  would  very  much 
like  to  talk  this  matter  over  with  you.  I  hope  you  will  never  have 
cause  to  regret  your  action.  I  can't  tell  you  how  pleased  I  am  that 
Maine  and  Illinois,  both  so  dear  to  me,  stood  by  me.  But  because  I  love 
them,  I  do  not  love  my  country  any  the  less,  as  you  know. 

"And  so  I  am  to  be  called  'Judge*  after  all !     This  is  between  ourselves. 

"Faithfully  yours, 

"M.  W.  FULLER." 

Senator  Frye  voted  in  favor  of  Judge  Fuller's  confirma 
tion.  He  did  this  partly,  I  believe,  because  Fuller  was  a 
Maine  man  and  a  classmate  of  his  at  Bowdoin  College,  he 
previously  having  entertained  some  doubts,  as  he  told  me 
afterwards,  whether  Fuller  was  really  qualified  to  be  Chief 
Justice  of  the  United  States.  Very  soon  after  his  appoint 
ment,  the  Chief  Justice  was  invited  to  deliver  an  address 
before  the  Joint  Session  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  I 
think  it  was  on  the  occasion  of  the  one-hundredth  anniver 
sary  of  the  inauguration  of  the  first  President  of  the  United 
States.  Senator  Frye  and  I  walked  together  over  to  the  hall 
of  the  House  where  the  joint  session  assembled,  and  he  said 
as  we  went  along:  "I  will  determine  to-day,  after  I  hear 
Fuller  deliver  his  address,  whether  I  did  right  or  wrong  in 
voting  for  his  confirmation  as  Chief  Justice."  Judge  Fuller 
delivered  a  most  beautiful  speech,  which  would  have  done 
credit  to  any  man,  no  matter  how  high  a  position  he  occupied 
in  this  or  any  other  country;  and  as  we  returned  together 
to  our  own  chamber,  Senator  Frye  remarked:  "Cullom, 
it  is  all  right.  I  am  satisfied  now  that  I  did  right  in  voting 
in  favor  of  the  confirmation  of  Fuller's  nomination." 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  241 

Melville  W.  Fuller  filled  the  position  of  Chief  Justice  of 
the  United  States  with  great  credit  and  dignity.  He  wrote, 
during  his  long  term  of  service,  many  very  able  opinions.  I 
did  not  agree  with  his  conclusions  in  the  Income  Tax  case; 
but  I  think  every  lawyer  will  concede  that  this  opinion  was 
about  as  able  a  presentation  of  that  side  of  the  case  as 
could  be  made.  He  was  a  most  conservative  and  safe  man 
for  the  high  position  which  he  occupied.  Of  necessity  the 
Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  must  be  an  executive 
officer  as  well  as  an  able  lawyer  and  judge.  There  was  no 
better  executive  officer  than  Chief  Justice  Fuller.  Justice 
Miller  told  me  on  one  occasion  that  Fuller  was  the  best 
presiding  judge  that  the  Supreme  Court  had  had  within  his 
time ;  and  in  addition  he  was  a  most  lovable,  congenial  man. 

The  last  time  I  saw  Judge  Fuller  he  was  particularly 
agreeable.  I  called  to  invite  him  to  deliver  an  address  at  a 
great  banquet  to  be  held  in  Springfield  on  Lincoln's  birth 
day  in  February,  1909.  I  have  had  a  great  deal  of  experi 
ence  in  trying  to  prevail  upon  prominent  men  to  deliver 
addresses  in  Illinois,  and  I  know  how  they  always  hesitate, 
and  hem  and  haw,  then,  if  they  do  accept,  destroy  all  feelings 
of  gratitude  and  appreciation  by  the  ungracious  manner  in 
which  they  do  so.  It  was  certainly  a  pleasant  surprise  and 
a  contrast  to  custom  to  hear  Judge  Fuller's  reply  when  I 
extended  the  invitation  to  him.  "Why,  certainly,"  he  re 
sponded  promptly;  "I  will  be  delighted  to  accept.  I  have 
been  wanting  to  visit  Springfield  for  twenty  years,  and  I  am 
glad  to  receive  the  invitation." 

This  reply  was  quite  characteristic  of  Chief  Justice  Ful 
ler.  I  could  not  imagine  him  saying  an  unkind  word  to 
any  one.  His  disposition  was  to  treat  his  colleagues  on  the 
Bench,  the  members  of  the  Bar  who  appeared  before  him, 
and  every  one  with  whom  he  came  in  contact,  with  the  great- 


242     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

est  kindness  and  consideration.  He  passed  away,  quietly 
and  peacefully,  as  he  would  have  wished,  honored  and  re 
spected  by  the  Bench  and  Bar  of  the  Nation,  and  by  the 
people  of  his  home  State,  who  took  pride  in  the  fact  that 
Illinois  had  furnished  to  the  United  States  a  Chief  Justice 
for  so  long  a  period. 

Chief  Justice  Fuller  was  succeeded  by  Hon.  Edward  D. 
White,  of  Louisiana,  with  whom  I  served  for  three  years  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  Justice  White  was  an  able 
Senator,  and  in  the  disposition  of  some  of  the  most  important 
cases  which  have  come  before  the  Supreme  Court  in  recent 
years  affecting  corporations  he  has  shown  great  ability  and  is 
a  worthy  successor  of  his  predecessors  in  that  high  office. 

Aside  from  the  act  to  regulate  commerce,  an  act  pro 
viding  for  the  Presidential  succession,  and  an  act  in  refer 
ence  to  polygamy,  there  was  very  little,  if  any,  important 
legislation  during  the  first  Cleveland  Administration^ 

It  was  a  very  quiet  administration.  The  country  clearly 
comprehended  that  the  Senate  stood  in  the  way  of  any 
Democratic  doctrine  being  enacted  into  law,  and  generally, 
as  I  remember  it  now,  the  country  was  fairly  prosperous. 
This  condition  continued  until  President  Cleveland's  famous 
Free  Trade  message  of  December  5,  1887,  came  as  a 
startling  blow  to  the  business  and  manufacturing  interests 
of  the  United  States. 

Why  he  should  have  sent  such  a  message  to  Congress 
when  his  administration  was  about  to  come  to  a  close,  and 
when  he  knew  perfectly  well  that  no  tariff  legislation  could 
be  enacted  with  a  Democratic  House  and  a  Republican  Sen 
ate,  I  do  not  know.  He  for  the  first  time  stepped  out 
boldly  and  asserted  his  Free  Trade  doctrine,  and  made  the 
issue  squarely  on  tariff  for  protection  as  against  Free  Trade, 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  243 

or  tariff  for  revenue.  This  message  naturally  precipitated 
a  tariff  discussion  in  both  House  and  Senate,  and  the  Demo 
cratic  majority  of  the  House  considered  it  incumbent  on 
them  to  make  some  attempt  to  carry  out  the  President's 
policy.  As  a  result  the  so-called  Mills  Bill  was  reported, 
upon  which  debates  continued  for  many  months.  One  mem 
ber  in  closing  the  discussion  very  aptly  said: 

"This  debate  will  perhaps  be  known  as  the  most  remark 
able  that  has  ever  occurred  in  our  parliamentary  history. 
It  has  awakened  an  interest  not  only  throughout  the  length 
and  breadth  of  our  own  country,  but  throughout  the  civil 
ized  world,  and  henceforth,  as  long  as  our  Government  shall 
endure,  it  will  be  known  as  'the  great  tariff  debate  of  1888.' ' 

It  was  in  this  debate  in  the  House  that  both  Mr.  Reed 
and  Mr.  McKinley  so  distinguished  themselves  as  the  great 
advocates  of  Protection.  Mr.  Reed  was  then  the  floor  leader 
of  the  minority.  He  made  a  magnificent  speech  against 
Free  Trade  in  which  he  used  many  familiar  allegories,  one 
of  which  I  have  often  used  myself  in  campaign  speeches. 
It  is  substantially  as  follows : 

"Once  there  was  a  dog.  He  was  a  nice  little  dog  —  nothing  the  mat 
ter  with  him,  except  a  few  foolish  Free  Trade  ideas  in  his  head.  He 
was  trotting  along,  happy  as  the  day,  for  he  had  in  his  mouth  a  nice 
shoulder  of  succulent  mutton.  By  and  by  he  came  to  a  stream  bridged 
by  a  plank.  He  trotted  along,  and  looking  over  the  side  of  the  plank, 
he  saw  the  markets  of  the  world,  and  dived  for  them.  A  minute  after 
wards  he  was  crawling  up  the  bank  the  wettest,  the  sickest,  the  nastiest, 
the  most  muttonless  dog  that  ever  swam  ashore." 

Thomas  B.  Reed  was  one  whom  I  unquestionably  would 
term  a  great  man.  He  was  conspicuous  among  the  most 
brilliant  presiding  officers  that  ever  occupied  the  chair  of 
the  Speaker.  He  ruled  the  House  with  a  rod  of  iron,  thus 
earning  for  himself  the  nickname  of  "Czar." 


244     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

And  this  was  more  or  less  warranted.  He  was  the  first 
Speaker  to  inaugurate  the  new  rules.  He  found  a  demor 
alized  House  in  which  it  was  difficult  to  enact  legislation, 
and  in  which  the  right  of  the  majority  to  rule  was  questioned 
and  hampered.  He  turned  the  Lower  House  into  an  orderly 
legislative  body  in  which  legislation  was  enacted  expeditiously 
by  the  majority.  He  had  more  perfect  control  over  the 
House  than  any  former  Speaker,  and  his  authority  remained 
unquestioned  until  he  retired.  He  ruled  alone;  after  he 
became  Speaker  he  had  no  favorites;  he  had  no  little  coterie 
of  men  around  him  to  excite  the  jealousy  of  the  members  of 
the  House,  and  it  has  even  been  said  that  so  careful  was  he 
in  this  respect  that  he  would  scarcely  venture  to  walk  in 
public  with  a  member  of  the  House.  He  was  a  powerful 
man  intellectually  and  physically,  and  he  looked  the  giant 
he  was  among  the  members  of  the  House.  He  wanted  to 
be  President;  and  it  seems  rather  a  queer  coincidence  that 
his  election  as  Speaker  paved  the  way  for  his  rival,  Mr. 
McKinley,  as  by  his  acceptance  of  the  chair  Mr.  McKinley 
became  the  leader  of  the  majority,  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Ways  and  Means,  the  author  of  the  McKinley 
Bill,  which  finally  resulted  in  its  author's  defeat  for  Con 
gress,  but  in  his  election  as  President  of  the  United  States 
in  1896. 

But  to  return  to  the  Mills  Bill.  It  passed  the  House  by 
a  substantial  majority  and  came  to  the  Senate,  where  a  sub 
stitute  was  prepared  by  the  Finance  Committee  and  reported 
by  Senator  Allison  early  in  October.  I  remember  the  dis 
cussion  on  it  in  the  Senate  very  well.  We  all  thought  it 
incumbent  upon  us  to  make  speeches  for  home  consumption 
for  campaign  use,  showing  the  iniquities  of  the  Mills  Bill 
and  of  the  Democratic  tariff  generally,  although  we  knew 
it  was  impossible  for  either  bill  to  become  law. 


CLEVELAND'S  FIRST  TERM  245 

The  Congressional  session  continued  until  about  the  mid 
dle  of  October  with  nothing  done  in  the  way  of  practical 
legislation. 

This  was  the  situation  when  the  National  Republican  Con 
vention  assembled  in  1888. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

CLEVELAND'S  DEFEAT  AND  HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM 
1888  TO  1891 

AT  the  time  the  delegates  gathered,  Cleveland's  Free 
Trade  message  of  1887  was  before  the  country,  inter 
est  in  it  having  been  augmented  and  enlivened  by  the  passage 
of  the  Mills  Bill  and  the  renowned  tariff  debate  of  that 
year.  The  issue  was  clear.  It  was  Protective  Tariff  versus 
Free  Trade.  After  a  rather  strenuous  contest  in  the  con 
vention  in  which  nineteen  candidates  were  voted  for,  for  the 
nomination  for  President,  including  the  leading  candidates, 
John  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  Walter  Q.  Gresham,  of  Indiana, 
Harrison,  of  Indiana,  and  Allison,  of  Iowa,  Benjamin  Har 
rison  finally  was  chosen  on  the  eighth  ballot. 

In  his  autobiography  Senator  Hoar  affirms  that  William 
B.  Allison  came  nearer  being  the  nominee  of  the  party  than 
any  other  man  in  its  history  who  was  a  candidate  and  failed 
to  secure  the  endorsement.  According  to  Senator  Hoar,  it 
was  the  opposition  of  Senator  Depew,  angered  by  the 
agrarian  hostility  toward  himself,  that  prevented  Senator 
Allison's  nomination.  I  have  no  personal  knowledge  that 
might  refute  this  statement,  but  I  have  been  disposed  to 
question  its  correctness. 

President  Cleveland  was  of  course  renominated.  The 
campaign  came  on,  and  he  was  defeated  squarely  on  the 
Tariff  issue,  and  the  Republicans  were  again  in  the  ascend 
ancy  in  both  branches  of  the  Government,  the  Senate  being 

246 


HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM  247 

composed  of  forty-seven  Republicans  and  thirty-seven  Dem 
ocrats,  while  the  House  contained  one  hundred  and  seventy 
Republicans  and  one  hundred  and  sixty  Democrats,  Mr. 
Reed  being  elected  Speaker. 

President  Harrison  was  inaugurated  with  a  great  civic 
and  military  display,  equalling,  if  not  surpassing  that  of 
any  other  President.  There  was  great  rejoicing  among  Re 
publicans  on  account  of  the  return  of  the  party  to  power. 
The  Cabinet  was  duly  appointed,  with  Mr.  Elaine,  the  fore 
most  Republican  and  statesman  of  his  day,  as  Secretary  of 
State  —  which,  by  the  way,  was  an  unfortunate  appoint 
ment  both  for  Mr.  Harrison  and  Mr.  Elaine.  There  was 
the  usual  scramble  for  offices,  the  usual  changes  in  the 
foreign  service,  in  the  executive  departments  in  Washing 
ton,  and  in  the  federal  offices  generally  throughout  the 
country.  Robert  T.  Lincoln,  of  whom  I  have  already  writ 
ten,  was  appointed  Minister  to  the  Court  of  St.  James. 

Colonel  Clark  E.  Carr,  of  Illinois,  was  appointed  as  Min 
ister  to  Denmark,  and  made  a  splendid  record  in  that  posi 
tion.  He  was  very  popular  with  the  royal  family.  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  visiting  Copenhagen  while  he  was  Minister 
there,  and  was  the  guest  of  Colonel  and  Mrs.  Carr,  who  en 
tertained  me  very  handsomely.  They  gave  a  dinner  in  my 
honor,  which  was  attended  by  the  whole  diplomatic  corps  at 
Copenhagen.  The  Colonel  also  arranged  for  a  private  audi 
ence  with  the  King,  and  he  presented  me  to  him,  as  he  also  did 
my  friend,  Colonel  Bluford  Wilson,  who  accompanied  me 
on  my  visit  to  Copenhagen.  Altogether,  through  the 
courtesy  of  Colonel  Carr,  I  enjoyed  my  stay  in  Copenhagen 
exceedingly. 

He  retired  from  office  after  Mr.  Cleveland  was  elected,  and 
has  since  achieved  distinction  as  an  author.  He  has  written 
several  very  interesting  books  which  have  had  a  wide  circu- 


248     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

lation.  For  many  years  Colonel  Carr  has  taken  an  active 
part  in  our  State  and  National  campaigns.  He  is  a  forceful 
speaker,  so  naturally  his  services  have  been  in  constant  requi 
sition  by  the  State  and  National  Republican  Committees. 
He  has  rendered  very  valuable  service  to  the  Republican 
party  both  in  the  State  and  in  the  Nation. 

I  had  known  President  Harrison  for  many  years.  He 
represented  a  neighboring  State  in  the  Senate,  of  which  body 
he  was  a  leader  when  I  entered  it  in  1883.  I  probably  knew 
him  as  well  as  any  of  my  Republican  colleagues;  but  his 
was  a  very  cold,  distant  temperament,  even  in  the  Senate, 
hardly  capable  of  forming  a  very  close  friendship  for  any 
one,  and  he  had  no  particular  friends. 

In  justice  to  Mr.  Harrison,  however,  it  must  be  said  that 
he  was  a  masterly  lawyer,  and  his  appointments  generally 
were  first-class.  Especially  was  he  fortunate  in  his  selection 
of  Federal  judges.  He  selected  them  himself,  and  would 
tolerate  no  interference  from  any  one.  He  did  select  the  very 
best  men  he  could  find.  For  instance,  he  appointed  such 
men  as  Justice  Brewer,  of  Kansas ;  Justice  Brown,  of  Michi 
gan;  Judge  Woods,  of  Indiana;  and  it  was  Harrison  who 
appointed  President  Taft  as  a  Federal  Judge.  He  was  an 
exceptionally  able  President,  and  gave  the  country  an  excel 
lent  administration. 

But  at  the  same  time  he  was  probably  the  most  unsatis 
factory  President  we  ever  had  in  the  White  House  to  those 
who  must  necessarily  come  into  personal  contact  with  him. 
He  was  quite  a  public  speaker,  and  the  story  has  often  been 
told  of  him  that  if  he  should  address  ten  thousand  men  from  a 
public  platform,  he  would  make  every  one  his  friend ;  but  if  he 
should  meet  each  of  those  ten  thousand  men  personally,  each 
man  would  go  away  his  enemy.  He  lacked  the  faculty  of 


HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM  249 

treating  people  in  a  manner  to  retain  their  friendship.  Even 
Senators  and  Representatives  calling  on  official  business  he 
would  treat  with  scant  courtesy.  He  scarcely  ever  invited 
any  one  to  have  a  chair.  ^ 

Senator  Platt,  of  Connecticut,  asked  me  one  day  if  I  was 
going  to  the  White  House  to  dine  that  evening,  stating  that 
he  had  an  invitation.  I  told  him  no,  that  I  had  not  been  in 
vited,  that  I  had  never  yet  during  the  Harrison  administra 
tion  even  been  invited  to  take  a  seat  in  the  White  House. 
Some  one  overheard  the  remark  and  it  was  published  in  the 
newspapers.  I  visited  the  White  House  shortly  afterwards, 
and  I  assume  that  Harrison  had  seen  it  because  as  soon  as 
he  saw  me,  without  a  smile  on  his  face  or  a  gleam  in  his  eye, 
he  hastened  to  get  me  a  chair,  inviting  me  to  be  seated.  I 
declined  to  sit  down,  explaining  that  I  was  in  a  hurry,  and 
closed  the  business  I  had  come  for,  and  left.  Afterwards 
he  invited  me  to  dinner  and  treated  me  with  marked  con 
sideration. 

I  have  sometimes  wondered  whether  President  Harrison's 
apparent  coldness  may  not  be  ascribed  to  an  absorption  in 
his  duties  that  made  him  unintentionally  neglectful  of  the 
little  amenities  of  polite  usage,  they  never  even  having  oc 
curred  to  him.  Despite  his  cold  exterior  and  frigid  manner, 
it  may  have  been  he  was  sympathetic  at  heart.  When  the 
Tracey  homestead  was  destroyed  by  fire,  which  resulted  in 
the  death  of  several  persons,  including  the  daughter,  and 
finally  resulted  in  the  death  of  Mrs.  Tracey,  President  Har 
rison  took  the  family  into  the  White  House  and  did  every 
thing  a  man  could  do  to  relieve  their  sufferings. 

I  suppose  he  treated  me  about  as  well  in  the  way  of  patron 
age  as  he  did  any  other  Senator;  but  whenever  he  did  any 
thing  for  me  it  was  done  so  ungraciously  that  the  concession 
tended  to  anger  rather  than  please. 


250     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

In  looking  over  the  letters  which  I  received  from  President 
Harrison,  I  find  one  which  would  show  that  he  placed  con 
siderable  confidence  in  my  recommendations. 

"EXECUTIVE  MANSION, 

WASHINGTON,  Oct.  24,  1889. 
"HoN.  SHELBY  M.  CULLOM, 

SPRINGFIELD,  ILLS. 
"Mr  DEAR  SENATOR: — 

"I  want  to  say  a  few  words  further  to  you  about  the  Chicago  ap 
pointments.  There  has  been  for  some  months  a  good  deal  of  complaint 
that  changes  were  not  made. 

"I  find  that  the  Collector  of  Customs  and  the  Collector  of  Internal 
Hevenue  were  appointed,  the  one  Sept.  14,  and  the  other  Sept.  10,  1885, 
and  that  the  first  was  confirmed  May  17,  1886;  and  the  last,  April  17, 
1886.  I  do  not  have  before  me  the  record  as  to  the  appointment  of 
the  United  States  District  Attorney.  The  Assistant  Treasurer  was  ap 
pointed  Sept.  29,  1885,  and  confirmed  May  6,  1886.  If  there  had 
been  no  question  raised  as  to  the  qualifications  and  fitness  of  the  per 
sons  recommended,  it  is  quite  possible  that  I  would  have  taken  some 
steps  in  the  matter  during  this  month;  but  the  fact  is,  as  you  have  told 
me,  that  at  least  one,  and  possibly  two,  of  the  persons  suggested  were 
not  of  a  high  order  of  fitness,  to  say  the  least,  and  some  members  of 
your  Congressional  delegation  interested  have  given  me  the  same  im 
pression,  while  from  outside  sources  there  have  been  a  good  many  things 
said  to  the  prejudice  of  persons  named  for  appointment.  I  am  informed 
that  Senator  Farwell  desires  to  leave  the  case  just  where  his  recom 
mendations  have  placed  it,  feeling  that  he  cannot  change  to  any  one 
else.  I  write  to  know  whether  you  also  feel  in  that  way,  or  whether 
you  desire  to  make  any  further  suggestions  about  the  matter.  I  have 
no  other  purpose  in  connection  with  these  appointments  than  to  find 
men,  the  mention  of  whose  names  will  commend  them  to  the  great  busi 
ness  community  they  are  to  serve.  No  one  of  those  named,  so  far  as  I 
know,  is  suggestive  of  any  personal  claim  upon  me,  and  I  have  no  per 
sonal  ends  to  serve.  You  agreed  with  me,  I  think,  when  we  conversed, 
that  the  appointees  there  should  be  men  of  as  high  character  for  integrity 
and  intelligence,  etc.,  as  those  they  would  supersede. 

"In  the  case  of  the  Assistant  Treasurer  I  found  on  examining  the 
papers  yesterday,  very  full  and  strong  papers  for  Mr.  Nichols,  whom 


HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM  251 

I  do  not  know.  He  is  supported,  apparently,  by  the  bankers  and  many 
leading  merchants  of  Chicago,  and  their  letters  give  in  detail  his  busi 
ness  character  and  experience.  Of  the  gentleman  recommended  by  you 
and  Senator  Farwell,  there  is  absolutely  nothing  said  in  the  papers, 
so  that  Mr.  Windon  or  I  could  have  any  information  as  to  whether  his 
business  experience  had  been  such  as  to  fit  him  for  this  place.  Now, 
I  am  sure  that  on  reflection  you  will  agree  that  we  ought  to  have  full 
information,  and  that  it  should  be  upon  record. 

"I  told  Mr.  Taylor,  in  conversation,  day  before  yesterday,  that  I  could 
not  appoint  Mr.  Babcock  marshal,  as  I  told  you  when  you  were  here; 
and  I  remember  that  you  said  you  had  yourself  refused  to  recom 
mend  him.  If  things  have  assumed  that  shape  that  you  are  of  the  opin 
ion  that  it  must  be  left  to  me  as  it  stands,  then  I  will  do  the  best  I  can 
with  it.  I  do  not  conceal  the  fact  that  after  the  essential  of  fitness  is 
secured  that  I  have  a  desire  to  please  our  party  friends  in  these  selec 
tions.  But  I  cannot  escape  the  responsibility  for  the  appointments,  and 
must  therefore  insist  upon  full  information  about  the  persons  presented, 
and  upon  my  ultimate  right,  in  all  kindness  to  everybody,  to  decide  upon 
what  must  be  done.  It  would  be  very  gratifying  to  me  if  the  responsi 
bility  were  placed  upon  some  one  else. 

"Please  let  me  have  any  suggestions  you  may  care  to  make. 

"Very  truly  yours, 

"BENJ.  HARRISON. 

"P.  S.  Responding  to  your  telegram  asking  delay  till  Nov.  5,  I  would 
say  that  I  have  no  disposition  to  hurry  a  decision.  Others  have  been 
pressing  me  and  complaining  bitterly  of  delay.  I  think,  however,  that 
the  sooner  some  of  these  cases  can  be  treated  as  submitted  for  decision 
the  better.  If  the  appointments  are  delayed  till  the  middle  of  Nov. 
there  is  little  use  of  making  temporary  appointments,  as  the  appointee 
would  have  to  make  two  bonds.  If  you  can  in  writing,  confidentially  if 
you  prefer,  give  me  your  views  and  submit  any  alternative  suggestions 
for  these  places  I  will  carefully  consider  them.  But  if  you  prefer  to 
see  me  personally  before  any  decision  is  made  as  to  Collector  of  the  Port 
I  will  of  course  lay  that  case  to  one  side  till  the  time  you  have  suggested. 

"Yours, 

"B.  H." 

I  never  became  entirely  estranged  from  him,  however,  and 
when  his  term  was  about  to  expire,  and  he  wanted  a  renomi- 


252     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

nation,  I  supported  him.  My  motive  in  so  doing  was  not 
so  much  that  I  favored  Harrison  as  because  I  felt  outraged 
at  the  way  The  Chicago  Tribune  had  treated  me.  The 
Tribune  was  then  supporting  Blaine  with  all  its  power,  and 
I  determined  that  Mr.  Medill  should  not  have  his  way ;  hence 
I  became  one  of  the  leaders  in  the  renomination  of  President 
Harrison. 

Before  leaving  Washington  for  the  convention  I  called 
to  see  the  President  to  learn  what  information  he  had  to 
impart  to  me  as  one  of  the  delegates  who  expected  to  sup 
port  him.  He  was  more  friendly,  free,  and  frank  than  he 
had  ever  been  during  his  term  as  President.  We  talked 
about  different  things,  and  in  the  course  of  the  conversation 
he  adverted  to  Secretary  Blaine. 

Harrison  and  Blaine  had  fallen  out.  Jealousy  was  proba 
bly  at  the  bottom  of  their  disaffection.  Harrison  did  not 
treat  Blaine  with  that  degree  of  confidence  and  courtesy  one 
would  expect  from  the  Chief  Executive  to  the  premier  of 
his  cabinet;  while  on  the  other  hand  Blaine  hated  Harrison 
and  was  plotting  more  or  less  against  him  while  he  was  a 
member  of  the  cabinet.  The  President  talked  very  freely 
about  Mr.  Blaine.  He  declared  that  he  had  been  doing  the 
work  of  the  State  Department  himself  for  a  year  or  more; 
that  he  had  prepared  every  important  official  document,  and 
had  the  originals  in  his  own  handwriting  in  the  desk  before 
him.  And  yet,  he  said,  Mr.  Blaine,  as  Secretary  of  State, 
was  giving  out  accounts  of  what  was  being  done  in  the  State 
Department,  taking  all  the  credit  to  himself.  He  expressed 
himself  as  being  perfectly  willing,  to  use  a  familiar  figure,  to 
carry  a  soldier's  knapsack  when  the  soldier  was  sore  of 
foot  and  tired,  and  all  that  he  wanted  in  return  was  acknowl 
edgment  of  the  act  and  a  show  of  appreciation.  This  was 
all  he  expected  of  Mr.  Blaine.  He  said,  in  closing  the  con- 


HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM  253 

versation,  that  he  intended  some  day  to  disclose  the  true 
condition  of  their  relations. 

The  Harrison  Administration  was  a  very  busy  one,  and 
should  have  been  a  very  satisfactory  one  to  the  country  at 
large.  The  first  great  subject  taken  up  by  Congress  was 
the  tariff,  the  final  disposition  of  which  was  embodied  in 
what  afterwards  became  known  as  the  "McKinley  Tariff 
Bill."  I  never  thought  that  Mr.  McKinley  showed  any  par 
ticular  skill  in  framing  that  tariff.  My  understanding  is 
that  it  was  prepared  by  the  majority  of  the  Committee  on 
Ways  and  Means. 

The  manufacturers  of  the  country  appeared  before  that 
committee  and  made  known  what  protective  duties  they 
thought  they  ought  to  have  in  order  to  carry  on  their  indus 
tries,  and  the  committee  gave  them  just  about  the  rate  of 
duty  they  desired.  It  was  a  high  protective  tariff,  dictated 
by  the  manufacturers  of  the  country.  It  resulted  in  a  great 
stimulus  to  the  country's  industries,  and  great  prosperity 
followed  its  enactment.  It  has  been  difficult  from  then  till 
now  to  reduce  duties  below  the  McKinley  rate.  The  manu 
facturers  have  since  persisted  and  insisted  upon  higher  dirties 
than  they  really  ought  to  have. 

I  may  remark  here,  in  passing,  that  the  McKinley  Law 
was  not  passed  until  October,  and  we  were  immediately 
plunged  into  the  campaign.  The  McKinley  Law  was  the 
issue,  and  the  Democrats  swept  everything  before  them, 
carrying  the  House  by  the  overwhelming  majority  of  ninety- 
seven.  The  Senate  still  remained  Republican,  forty-seven 
Republicans  to  thirty-nine  Democrats.  McKinley  himself 
was  beaten  and  never  afterwards  returned  to  Congress. 

It  is  strange  what  a  revolution  periodically  occurs  among 
the  voters  of  the  United  States.  When  the  Mills  Bill 


254,     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

was  the  issue  the  Democratic  party  was  beaten,  and  badly 
beaten ;  the  Republican  party  came  into  power ;  the  McKinley 
Bill  was  passed,  and  we  suffered  about  as  bad  a  defeat  as 
had  the  Democrats  two  years  previously.  The  difference 
was  that  the  Democrats  were  cleaned  out  on  the  shadow  of  an 
issue,  without  the  reality  (the  Mills  Bill  never  having  become 
a  law),  and  we  went  down  in  defeat  on  the  reality,  the  Mc 
Kinley  Bill  having  become  a  law. 

It  was  during  this  time  also  that  the  bill  known  as  the 
Sherman  Law,  or  the  Coinage  Act  of  1890,  was  passed, 
which  directed  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  to  the  aggre 
gate  of  4,500,000  ounces  in  each  month,  and  the  issuance  for 
such  purchases  silver  bullion  treasury  notes.  This  was  prob 
ably  the  beginning  of  the  silver  agitation.  It  created  a  long 
discussion  in  Senate  and  House,  and  that  subject  was  con 
stantly  before  Congress  until  it  was  finally  settled  by  the 
election  of  McKinley,  in  1896. 

It  was  this  Congress  also  that  passed  the  Sherman  Anti- 
Trust  Act  (April  8,  1890) .  It  was  one  of  the  most  impor 
tant  enactments  ever  passed  by  Congress;  and  yet,  if  it 
were  strictly  and  literally  enforced,  the  business  of  the  coun 
try  would  come  to  a  standstill.  The  courts  have  given  it  a 
very  broad  construction,  making  it  cover  contracts  never  con 
templated  when  the  act  was  passed.  It  was  never  seriously 
enforced  until  the  coming  in  of  the  Roosevelt  Administration, 
when  the  great  prosperity  brought  about  under  the  McKinley 
Administration  tended  to  the  formation  of  vast  combinations 
which  seriously  threatened  the  country.  The  people  do  not 
seem  disposed  to  consent  even  to  its  amendment,  much  less 
to  its  repeal;  and  yet  we  all  realize  that  if  strictly  enforced 
as  construed  by  the  courts,  it  would  materially  affect  the 
business  prosperity  of  the  nation.  The  people  take  the  same 
attitude  towards  the  Sherman  Law  as  they  take  toward  the 


HARRISON'S  FIRST  TERM  255 

anti-pooling  section  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act:  they 
will  allow  neither  of  them  to  be  tampered  with  by  Congress. 
There  has  been  considerable  dispute  as  to  the  paternity  of 
the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law.  Senator  Hoar  claims  he 
wrote  it;  it  bears  Senator  Sherman's  name;  and  my  own 
opinion  is  that  Senator  Edmunds  had  more  to  do  with 
framing  it  than  any  other  one  Senator. 

It  was  during  the  first  and  second  sessions  of  the  Fifty- 
first  Congress  that  the  Federal  Election  Bill,  so-called,  or  as 
it  is  familiarly  known,  the  "Force  Bill,"  was  discussed.  It 
was  in  charge  of  Senator  Hoar,  and  occupied  the  attention 
of  both  sessions  for  a  long  time.  The  Republicans  seemed 
determined  to  force  it  through,  but  the  Democrats  from  the 
South  were  bitterly  opposed  to  it,  resorting  to  all  sorts  of 
tactics  to  delay  or  kill  it. 

This  measure  I  never  considered  much  of  a  "force"  bill. 
I  could  never  see  that  there  was  any  force  to  it,  but  on  the 
contrary,  considered  it  a  very  mild  measure,  and  gave  it  my 
support.  The  opposition  to  it  was  so  bitter  and  strong  and 
so  skilfully  managed  by  the  late  Senator  Gorman  on  the  part 
of  the  minority,  and  it  stood  for  so  long  a  time  in  the  way 
of  other  legislation,  that  one  afternoon  Senator  Wolcott 
arose  in  his  seat  and,  very  much  to  the  astonishment  of  every 
one,  moved  to  lay  it  aside  and  take  up  some  other  bill.  The 
motion  carried,  and  that  was  the  last  we  heard  of  the  Force 
Bill. 

The  McKinley  Tariff  Act,  the  Anti-Trust  Law,  the  Sher 
man  Coinage  Act,  and  the  Federal  Election  Bill  were  the 
important  bills  passed  before  this  Congress. 

Notwithstanding  the  magnificent  record  in  the  way  of 
legislation  made  by  the  first  Congress  under  the  Harrison 
Administration,  the  Democratic  victory  was  so  complete  that 
at  the  beginning  of  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-second  Con- 


256     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

gress,  which  met  December  7,  1891,  there  were  but  eighty- 
eight  Republicans  in  the  House,  as  against  two  hundred  and 
thirty-six  Democrats,  and  Mr.  Charles  F.  Crisp,  of  Georgia, 
was  elected  Speaker.  The  Senate  still  remained  in  the  con 
trol  of  the  Republicans. 

It  was  during  this  Congress  that  the  silver  agitation  came 
to  the  front  as  one  of  the  foremost  issues.  Senator  Stewart, 
of  Nevada,  introduced  his  bill  for  the  free  coinage  of  gold 
and  silver  bullion.  The  free  coinage  question  consumed 
months  of  the  time  of  both  Senate  and  House,  and  finally 
came  to  naught. 

The  Act  to  establish  the  World's  Fair  at  Chicago  was 
passed.  I  took  a  very  active  interest  in  this  in  behalf  of 
Chicago.  A  meeting  was  held  in  the  Marble  Room  of  the 
Capitol,  where  Senator  Depew  represented  New  York,  and 
Colonel  Thomas  B.  Bryan,  Chicago.  They  each  made  a 
speech.  Very  much  to  my  surprise,  Colonel  Bryan's  was  the 
more  effective.  We  afterwards,  by  all  sorts  of  efforts  in 
the  House  and  Senate,  captured  the  location  for  Chicago. 
The  Fair,  when  it  was  finally  held,  was  the  greatest  world's 
fair  ever  known.  There  was  an  almost  utter  abandon  in  the 
expenditure  of  money,  and  Congress  assisted  by  a  liberal 
appropriation.  That  Fair  was  a  great  injury,  rather  than 
a  benefit,  to  the  city  of  Chicago.  The  hard  times  came  on, 
and  it  was  years  before  the  city  was  restored  to  normal  con 
ditions. 

Toward  the  end  of  this  session,  the  Homestead  riots  were 
a  subject  of  debate  and  investigation  by  Congress.  A 
Presidential  campaign  was  approaching,  and  the  Democrats 
were  eager  to  throw  upon  the  Republicans  the  blame  for  all 
labor  disturbances,  the  riots  at  Homestead  in  particular. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM 
1892  TO  1896 

1HAVE  already,  in  other  parts  of  these  recollections, 
referred  to  the  National  Convention  of  1892,  and  the 
reasons  which  induced  me  to  support  President  Harrison 
for  renomination.  I  attended  as  one  of  the  delegates,  and 
took  a  more  or  less  active  part  in  the  work  of  the  convention. 
Harrison  was  chosen  on  the  first  ballot.  No  other  candidate 
had  any  chance.  Mr.  Elaine  and  Mr.  McKinley  on  that 
ballot  received  one  hundred  and  eighty -two  votes  each,  but 
neither  was  really  considered  for  the  nomination. 

Grover  Cleveland,  of  course,  was  the  principal  candidate 
before  the  Democratic  Convention,  and  had  no  serious 
opposition  aside  from  the  bitter  personal  enmity  evinced 
toward  him  by  David  B.  Hill,  of  New  York,  who  had  suc 
ceeded  him  as  Governor  of  that  State,  and  had  hoped  to 
succeed  him  as  President.  Senator  Hill  has  only  recently 
passed  away.  He  was  one  of  the  most  astute  and  ablest 
politicians  in  the  history  of  the  Democratic  party.  Presi 
dent  Cleveland  determined,  for  some  reason  or  other,  to  drive 
him  out  of  public  life,  and  he  succeeded  in  doing  so  during 
his  second  administration  as  President. 

The  campaign  of  1892,  just  as  the  previous  Presidential 
campaign  had  been,  was  entirely  fought  out  on  the  tariff 
issue;  and  the  question  in  general  was  the  McKinley  Law 
17  257 


258     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  its  results.  The  Democrats  were  able  to  show  that  there 
had  been  increase  in  cost  in  many  articles  regarded  as  neces 
saries,  while  the  Republicans  pointed  to  a  great  era  of 
national  prosperity.  The  Republicans  contended  also  that 
wages  had  advanced  and  prices  declined  under  the  McKinley 
Law;  but  I  have  always  doubted  whether  we  were  able  to 
sustain  that  contention.  For  instance,  the  department  stores 
and  retail  merchants  generally  marked  up  prices,  and  wholly 
without  reason,  on  articles  on  which  there  had  been  no  in 
crease  in  the  tariff;  and  when  asked  why,  they  would  reply, 
"It  is  because  of  the  McKinley  tariff." 

For  these  economic  reasons,  added  to  the  labor  disturb 
ances,  Mr.  Cleveland  was  again  elected  President  of  the 
United  States,  and  carried  with  him  for  the  first  time  both 
the  Senate  and  House.  The  Democrats  now  had  complete 
control  of  all  branches  of  the  Government,  and  were  in  a 
position,  if  united,  to  enact  any  legislation  they  might  de 
sire.  The  result  of  the  election  was  a  complete  surprise  to 
every  one.  Why  the  voters  should  have  turned  against  the 
Republican  administration,  it  is  hard  to  say.  Mr.  Harri 
son's  personality  had  much  to  do  with  it. 

The  times  were  never  more  prosperous.  In  his  message 
to  the  Congress  which  convened  after  his  defeat,  President 
Harrison  appositely  said:  "There  never  has  been  a  time  in 
our  history  when  work  was  so  abundant,  or  when  wages  were 
so  high,  whether  measured  in  the  currency  in  which  they  are 
paid,  or  by  their  power  to  supply  the  necessaries  and  com 
forts  of  life."  And  yet,  with  this  admitted  condition  prevail 
ing,  the  Democratic  party  was  returned  to  power. 

I  felt  very  badly  over  President  Harrison's  defeat,  as  I 
had  done  everything  I  could  to  secure,  first,  his  renomination 
and  then  his  reelection.  After  the  election  I  wrote  President 
Harrison  as  follows : 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     259 

"U.  S.  SENATE  CHAMBER, 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  Nov.  11,  1890. 
"DEAR  MR.  PRESIDENT: — 

"I  have  delayed  writing  you  since  the  election  for  the  reason  that  the 
result  so  surprised  me  I  scarcely  knew  what  to  make  of  it.  We  lost 
Illinois  by  the  overwhelming  Democratic  vote  in  Chicago.  I  feared 
that  city  all  the  time,  but  was  assured  by  the  committees  that  it  would 
not  be  very  much  against  us.  I  said  all  the  time  that  we  would  take 
care  of  the  country  and  carry  the  State  if  the  Cook  County  vote  could  be 
kept  below  ten  thousand  Democratic,  and  was  assured  by  all  hands 
there  that  it  would  be.  We  did  carry  the  country  about  as  hereto 
fore.  As  things  have  gone  bad  nearly  everywhere,  I  am  not  feeling  so 
chagrined  as  I  would  if  Illinois  had  been  the  pivotal  State.  I  specially 
desire  to  say  that  the  cause  of  the  defeat  does  not  lie  at  your  door 
personally.  Any  man  in  the  country  standing  upon  the  doctrine  of  high 
protection  would  have  been  defeated.  The  people  sat  down  upon  the 
McKinley  Tariff  Bill  two  years  ago,  and  they  have  never  gotten  up. 
They  were  thoroughly  imbued  with  the  feeling  that  the  party  did  not  do 
right  in  revising  the  tariff  up  instead  of  down.  They  beat  us  for  it 
in  '90  and  now  again. 

"Hoping  to  see  you  in  ten  days,  I  am,  with  great  respect, 

"Truly  yours, 

"S.  M.  CULLOM." 

Curtis,  in  his  work  on  the  Republican  party,  in  comment 
ing  on  the  result  of  this  election,  said : 

"It  will  be  seen  that  to  the  Solid  South  were  added,  California,  Con 
necticut,  Illinois,  Indiana,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  West  Virginia,  and 
Wisconsin;  while  Mr.  Cleveland  obtained  one  electoral  vote  in  Ohio, 
and  five  in  Michigan.  The  result  was  certainly  disastrous,  and  left  no 
doubt  that  the  people  at  large  for  the  time  being  had  rebuked  the  Re 
publican  party  for  what  they  wrongly  supposed  to  be  against  their  best 
interests.  And  yet,  though  a  large  majority  of  the  people  had  voted 
for  Mr.  Cleveland,  they  were  probably  sorry  for  it  within  twenty-four 
hours  after  the  election.  There  was  no  such  rejoicing  as  took  place  in 
1884.  In  fact,  as  soon  as  it  was  determined  without  doubt  that  the 
next  Congress  would  be  Democratic  in  both  branches,  and  would  enable 
Mr.  Cleveland  and  his  party  to  carry  out  their  threats  to  repeal  the 


260     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

McKinley  Law  and  enact  in  its  stead  a  Free  Trade  measure,  appre 
hension  and  alarm  took  possession  of  the  industrial  and  financial  inter 
ests  of  the  country,  and  could  the  election  have  been  held  over  again 
within  ten  days,  it  may  be  estimated  that  a  million  or  more  votes  would 
have  been  changed  from  the  Cleveland  column  to  that  of  Harrison. 
The  people,  as  it  were,  awoke  from  a  dream;  they  saw  at  once  how  they 
had  been  deceived  by  the  methods  of  the  Democratic  campaign  man 
agers,  and  how  an  incident  which  had  no  bearing  whatever  upon  the 
issue  of  the  campaign  had  influenced  their  vote  in  a  time  of  temporary 
anger  and  resentment." 

This  perfectly  sums  up  the  situation,  as  I  now  recollect  it, 
on  the  election  of  President  Cleveland ;  it  was  the  beginning 
of  the  most  protracted  era  of  hard  times  that  this  country 
has  ever  known. 

Mr.  Cleveland  was  inaugurated  the  second  time  on  March 
4,  1893,  and,  as  Mr.  Curtis  says,  there  was  very  little  en 
thusiasm.  The  ceremonies  were  quiet  and  unenlivened. 

Of  course,  it  goes  without  saying,  that  I  was  not  glad  to 
see  the  Democratic  party  returned  to  power;  but  I  confess 
I  was  a  little  pleased  to  meet  President  Cleveland  in  the 
White  House  again.  His  manner,  his  treatment  of  those 
with  whom  he  came  in  contact,  was  so  different  from  that 
of  his  predecessor,  that  it  was  a  real  pleasure,  rather  than 
a  burden,  to  call  at  the  executive  offices. 

Mr.  Cleveland  promptly  proceeded  to  remove  Republicans 
from  Presidential  offices  and  appoint  Democrats.  This  even 
went  to  the  extent  of  the  removal  of  postmasters,  large 
and  small,  against  whom  almost  any  sort  of  charge  might  be 
trumped  up. 

Adlai  E.  Stevenson  was  a  past  master  in  this  respect.  He 
was  First  Assistant  Postmaster-General  under  Cleveland's 
first  Administration  and  removed  Republican  postmasters 
whose  terms  had  not  expired,  without  cause  or  reason.  He 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     261 

was  elected  Vice-President  when  Mr.  Cleveland  again  came 
into  office.  He  was  a  great  favorite  among  the  Democrats, 
because  he  believed  in  appointing  Democrats  to  every  office 
within  the  gift  of  the  Executive. 

I  remember,  after  Stevenson  was  elected,  Senator  Harris, 
of  Tennessee,  remarking  to  me:  "Now  we  have  got  Cleve 
land  and  Stevenson  elected,  if  Cleveland  would  drop  out  and 
Stevenson  was  President,  we  would  get  along  finely." 
He  meant  that  Stevenson  would  never  permit  a  single  Re 
publican  to  remain  in  office,  if  he  could  help  it. 

Mr.  Stevenson  made  a  popular  presiding-officer  of  the 
Senate.  He  has  been  a  strong  Democrat  all  his  life,  and  it 
has  repeatedly  been  charged  against  him,  although  I  believe 
he  denies  it,  that  he  was  a  Southern  sympathizer  during  the 
Civil  War.  He  served  in  Congress  for  two  terms,  having 
been  elected  from  the  Bloomington  district,  and  was  quite 
an  influential  member.  He  was  defeated  as  a  candidate  for 
Vice-President  with  Mr.  Bryan  in  1900,  and  was  also  de 
feated  as  a  candidate  of  the  Democratic  party  for  Governor 
of  Illinois,  in  1908. 

As  a  candidate  for  Governor  he  made  a  splendid  showing 
in  1908,  as  he  was  defeated  by  23,164  votes,  while  President 
Taft  carried  Illinois  by  179,122. 

President  Cleveland's  Cabinet  contained  some  very  able 
men.  He  appointed  Judge  Walter  Q.  Gresham  as  Sec 
retary  of  State.  Why  he  should  have  appointed  Gres 
ham,  I  do  not  know.  It  would  seem  to  me  that  there  were 
men  of  as  much  ability  in  his  own  party  whom  he  might 
have  selected,  but  for  some  reason  or  other  he  did  ap 
point  him. 

Judge  Gresham  was  then  serving  as  United  States  Cir 
cuit  Judge,  at  Chicago.  He  had  always  been  a  Republican, 
and  in  the  convention  which  nominated  Harrison  he  received 


262     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

on  one  ballot  one  hundred  and  twenty-three  votes  as  the 
candidate  of  the  Republican  party  for  President  of  the 
United  States.  He  probably  supported  Mr.  Cleveland,  al 
though  of  this  I  am  not  sure.  He  was  a  bitter  enemy  of 
President  Harrison, —  so  much  so,  indeed,  that  he  could 
scarcely  be  polite  to  any  one  whom  he  thought  favored  Har 
rison.  He  was  holding  court  in  Springfield,  during  the 
Harrison  Administration,  when  I  met  him,  and,  not  appre 
ciating  his  feeling,  I  casually  commended  President  Harri 
son  for  some  particular  thing  which  I  approved.  Gresham 
did  not  like  it,  and  he  almost  told  me  in  so  many  words  that 
he  did  not  think  much  of  me  or  any  one  else  who  thought 
well  of  Harrison.  Whereupon  we  separated  somewiiat 
coolly,  I  giving  him  to  understand  that  I  would  insist  upon 
my  views  and  my  right  to  commend  a  man  who  I  thought 
was  following  a  proper  course.  I  do  not  believe  he  ever 
avowed  himself  a  Democrat,  and  in  the  State  Department  he 
always  declined  to  make  any  recommendations  for  appoint 
ments,  on  the  ground  that  he  was  not  a  Democrat,  and  that 
those  appointments  must  be  left  to  the  President  himself.  I 
had  more  or  less  intercourse  with  him  as  Secretary  of  State, 
and  always  found  him  polite  and  agreeable.  He  was  re 
garded  as  an  able  Secretary,  and  served  in  that  office  until 
his  death. 

Richard  Olney  succeeded  him  as  Secretary  of  State.  He 
had  been  the  Attorney- General  in  the  cabinet.  He  was  to  me 
a  much  more  satisfactory  Secretary  than  Judge  Gresham, 
and  fully  as  able  a  lawyer. 

John  G.  Carlisle  was  appointed  Secretary  of  the  Treas 
ury.  He  had  been  seven  times  elected  to  Congress  and 
three  times  Speaker.  He  resigned  his  seat  in  the  House, 
having  been  elected  as  a  member  of  the  Senate  from  Ken 
tucky,  and  remained  in  the  Senate  until  he  resigned  to 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     263 

accept  the  position  of  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under 
Cleveland. 

Mr.  Carlisle  was  in  entire  harmony  with  the  President  on 
the  tariff  and  also  on  the  monetary  question  —  and,  indeed, 
I  remark  here  that  Mr.  Carlisle  had  very  much  to  do  toward 
the  defeat  of  Mr.  Bryan  in  1896.  Although  a  life-long 
Democrat  himself,  he  believed  that  Mr.  Bryan's  theories  on 
the  monetary  question  would  ruin  the  country,  and  he  stood 
with  Mr.  Cleveland  in  opposing  his  election.  Had  Cleve 
land,  Carlisle,  and  other  patriotic  Gold  Democrats  stood 
with  their  party,  Mr.  Bryan  would  probably  have  been 
elected  and  the  history  of  this  country  would  have  been  writ 
ten  differently. 

After  Mr.  Cleveland's  election,  our  industrial  conditions 
became  so  depressed  —  and  it  was  alleged  by  many  that  the 
cause  for  this  was  the  Sherman  Coinage  Act  of  1890  — 
that  a  special  session  of  Congress  was  called  to  meet  August 
7, 1893.  The  President  said  in  his  message  to  this  Congress : 

"The  existence  of  an  alarming  and  extraordinary  business  situation, 
involving  the  welfare  and  prosperity  of  all  our  people,  has  constrained 
me  to  call  in  extra  session  the  people's  representatives  in  Congress,  to 
the  end  that  through  a  wise  and  patriotic  exercise  of  the  legislative  duty 
with  which  they  are  solely  charged,  present  evils  may  be  mitigated  and 
dangers  threatening  the  future  may  be  averted.  .  .  .  With  plenteous 
crops,  with  abundant  promise  of  remunerative  production  and  manu 
facture,  with  unusual  invitation  to  safe  investment,  and  with  satisfactory 
returns  to  business  enterprise,  suddenly  financial  fear  and  distrust  have 
sprung  up  on  every  side.  .  .  .  Values  supposed  to  be  fixed  are  fast 
becoming  conjectural,  and  loss  and  failure  have  involved  every  branch 
of  business.  I  believe  these  things  are  principally  chargeable  to  Con 
gressional  legislation  touching  the  purchase  and  coinage  of  silver  by  the 
general  Government." 

And  Mr.  Cleveland  earnestly  recommended  the  prompt 
repeal  of  the  Sherman  Coinage  Act  of  1890. 


264     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

The  extra  session  continued  until  October  30,  when  the 
Sherman  Act  was  finally  repealed. 

•But  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  Act  did  not  at  all  remedy 
industrial  conditions.  It  was  not  the  Sherman  Act  that  was 
at  fault,  but  the  well-grounded  fear  on  the  part  of  our  man 
ufacturers  of  the  passage  of  a  free  trade  measure.  The 
panic  commenced,  it  is  true,  under  the  McKinley  Bill,  but 
it  was  the  direct  result  of  what  the  business  interests  felt 
sure  was  to  come ;  and  that  was  the  passage  of  a  Democratic 
Tariff  act. 

The  year  1893  closed  with  the  prices  of  many  products  at 
the  lowest  ever  known,  with  many  workers  seeking  in  vain 
for  work,  and  with  charity  laboring  to  keep  back  suffering 
and  starvation  in  all  our  cities.  And  yet,  in  view  of  this 
condition,  Mr.  Cleveland  sent  to  Congress  at  the  beginning 
of  the  annual  session  a  free  trade  message,  advocating  the 
repeal  of  the  McKinley  Act  and  the  passage  of  a  Demo 
cratic  free  trade,  or  Tariff  for  Revenue,  measure.  From 
the  tone  of  this  message,  however,  he  seems  to  have  changed 
somewhat  from  his  message  of  1887;  yet  it  was  strong 
enough  to  startle  the  business  interests,  and  make  more  wide 
spread  financial  panic. 

Speaker  Crisp  at  once  proceeded  to  the  formation  of  the 
committees  of  the  House,  and  particularly  the  Committee 
on  Ways  and  Means. 

I  was  naturally  anxious  concerning  our  industries  in  Illi 
nois,  and  I  wanted  one  of  our  strongest  Illinois  Representa 
tives  placed  on  that  committee.  I  happened  to  enjoy  par 
ticularly  friendly  relations  with  Mr.  Crisp,  he  having  been 
a  House  conferee  on  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act  of  1887, 
and  I  felt  quite  free  to  call  upon  him.  After  looking  over 
the  Illinois  delegation,  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Hon.  A.  J.  Hopkins,  my  late  colleague  in  the  Senate,  and 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     265 

who  was  then  serving  in  the  House,  was  the  very  best  man 
he  could  select  for  the  place.  I  urged  Mr.  Crisp  to  appoint 
him,  saying  that  he  was  capable  of  doing  more  and  better 
work  on  the  committee  than  any  other  man  in  the  delegation. 
Crisp  was  very  nice  about  it,  and  whether  he  did  it  on  my 
recommendation  or  not  I  do  not  know;  but  he  appointed 
Hopkins.  Senator  Hopkins  was,  during  his  service  on  that 
committee,  regarded  as  one  of  its  leading  members,  and  had 
a  prominent  part  in  framing  the  Dingley  tariff.  He  served 
in  the  House  until  elected  to  the  Senate,  where  he  remained 
for  six  years.  Senator  Hopkins  is  an  able  man,  and  was 
constantly  growing  in  influence  and  power  in  the  Senate. 
He  was  an  agreeable  colleague,  and  I  regretted  very  much  in 
deed  that  he  was  not  reflected. 

It  did  not  take  long  for  the  Democratic  majority  of  the 
Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  of  the  House  to  frame  and 
report  the  Wilson  Bill,  repealing  the  McKinley  Bill,  and 
recommending  in  its  stead  the  enactment  of  a  Tariff  for 
Revenue,  which  was  fairly  in  harmony  with  Democratic 
Free  Trade  principles,  and  in  harmony  with  the  President's 
message.  The  bill  was  passed  without  long  delay,  Mr. 
Reed  leading  the  ineffectual  opposition  to  its  passage  in  the 
House,  with  a  speech  of  great  eloquence,  in  which  he  de 
picted  conditions  that  would  surely  arise  after  the  passage 
of  such  a  measure. 

But  this  bill  still  had  to  run  the  gantlet  of  the  Senate, 
where  many  Democratic  Senators  did  not  sympathize  to 
the  full  extent  with  the  Cleveland-Carlisle  Free  Trade  the 
ory.  Senators  Gorman,  Hill,  Murphy,  Jones,  Brice,  and 
Smith  of  New  Jersey,  led  the  opposition,  uniting  with  the 
Republicans  in  securing  some  seven  hundred  amendments, 
all  in  the  interest,  more  or  less,  of  Protection. 

The  truth  is,  we  were  all  —  Democrats  as  well  as  Repub- 


266     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

licans  —  trying  to  get  in  amendments  in  the  interest  of 
protecting  the  industries  of  our  respective  States.  I  my 
self  secured  the  adoption  of  many  such  amendments.  After 
I  had  exhausted  every  resource,  I  went  to  Senator  Brice  one 
day  and  asked  him  if  he  would  not  offer  some  little  amend 
ment  for  me,  as  I  felt  pretty  sure  that  if  Brice  offered  it, 
it  would  be  adopted,  and  I  knew  if  I  did  it  myself  it  stood 
a  good  chance  of  being  defeated.  Brice,  by  the  way,  was 
a  very  bluff,  frank  man;  he  replied  to  me,  half  jocularly: 
"Now,  you  know  when  your  party  is  in  power  you  will  never 
do  anything  for  a  Democrat,  and  I  won't  offer  this  amend 
ment  for  you.  You  go  and  get  your  colleague,  Senator 
Palmer,  to  offer  it  for  you."  I  left  him  and  went  to  Gen 
eral  Palmer;  he  presented  the  amendment,  and  it  was 
adopted. 

The  bill  passed  the  Senate;  and  after  going  to  con 
ference,  when  it  seemed  likely  the  Conference  Committee 
would  not  agree,  the  Democratic  leaders  of  the  House,  fear 
ing  the  bill  would  fail  entirely,  decided  to  surrender  to  the 
Senate  and  accept  the  Senate  bill  with  all  its  amendments. 
President  Cleveland  denounced  this  temporizing,  coining  his 
famous  expression,  "party  perfidy  and  party  dishonor"  in 
the  Wilson  letter,  evidently  referring  to  Mr.  Gorman  and 
other  leaders  of  the  Senate. 

There  has  been  endless  controversy  and  discussion  over 
the  attitude  of  Senator  Gorman  on  the  Wilson  Bill.  I  my 
self  have  always  believed  that  Senator  Gorman  felt 
that  the  industries  of  the  country  could  not  prosper 
under  a  Democratic  Free  Trade  Tariff,  and  that  he 
was  willing  to  afford  them  a  certain  amount  of 
protection.  Especially  was  he  criticised  on  account  of  the 
sugar  schedule.  Senator  Tillman  in  his  memorial  address 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     267 

in  the  Senate,  on  the  occasion  of  the  delivery  of  eulogies  on 
Senator  Gorman,  said  in  reference  to  this: 

"In  the  conversations  I  had  with  the  Democratic  leaders,  it  was  clearly 
brought  out  that  the  sugar  refineries  were  ready  to  contribute  to  the 
Democratic  campaign  fund  if  it  could  be  understood  that  the  industry 
would  be  fostered  and  not  destroyed  by  the  Democratic  Tariff  policy,  and 
I  received  the  impression,  which  became  indelibly  fixed  on  my  mind  then 
and  remains  fixed  to  this  day,  that  President  Cleveland  understood  the 
situation  and  was  willing  to  acquiesce  in  it  if  we  won  at  the  polls.  I 
did  not  talk  with  Mr.  Cleveland  in  person  on  this  subject,  though  I 
called  at  his  hotel  to  pay  my  respects,  and  I  am  thoroughly  satisfied  that 
the  charge  of  party  perfidy  and  party  dishonor  was  an  act  of  the  grossest 
wrong  and  cruelty  to  Senator  Gorman.  If  Mr.  Cleveland,  as  I  was  told, 
knew  of  these  negotiations  and  was  the  beneficiary  of  such  a  contribu 
tion,  it  is  inconceivable  how  he  could  lend  his  great  name  and  influence 
toward  destroying  Senator  Gorman's  influence  and  popularity,  in  the  way 
he  did." 

Senator  Gorman  himself  was  very  justly  indignant  and 
displayed  much  feeling  when  he  addressed  the  Senate  on 
July  23,  1894,  replying  to  Mr.  Cleveland's  letter. 

He  used,  in  part,  the  following  language : 

"As  I  have  said,  sir,  this  is  a  most  extraordinary  proceeding  for  a 
Democrat,  elected  to  the  highest  place  in  the  Government,  and  fellow 
Democrats  in  another  high  place,  where  they  have  the  right  to  speak 
and  legislate  generally,  to  join  with  the  commune  in  traducing  the  Sen 
ate  of  the  United  States,  to  blacken  the  character  of  Senators  who  are 
as  honorable  as  they  are,  who  are  as  patriotic  as  they  ever  can  be, 
who  have  done  as  much  to  serve  their  party  as  men  who  are  now  the 
beneficiaries  of  your  labor  and  mine,  to  taunt  and  jeer  us  before  the 
country  as  the  advocates  of  trust  and  as  guilty  of  dishonor  and  perfidy." 

It  was  a  Democratic  controversy,  and  I  am  not  in  a  posi 
tion  to  say  whether  Mr.  Cleveland  or  Mr.  Gorman  was 
right;  whether  it  was  a  bargain  in  advance  of  the  election 


268     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

to  secure  campaign  funds;  whether  the  sugar  schedule  was 
framed  to  secure  the  support  of  the  Louisiana  Senators; 
but  I  do  know  that  Mr.  Cleveland's  attacks  on  Mr.  Gorman 
turned  the  State  of  Maryland  over  to  the  Republicans  and 
relegated  Mr.  Gorman  to  private  life. 

The  Wilson  Bill  became  a  law  without  the  approval  of 
the  President,  Mr.  Cleveland  taking  the  position  that  he 
would  not  permit  himself  to  be  separated  from  his  party 
to  such  an  extent  as  might  be  implied  by  a  veto  of  the  tariff 
legislation  which,  though  disappointing  to  him,  he  said  was 
still  chargeable  to  Democratic  efforts. 

There  was  one  provision  of  the  Wilson  Bill  which,  I 
have  become  convinced  since,  was  a  very  wise  measure,  and 
which  will  yet  be  enacted  into  law;  and  that  is  the  income- 
tax  provision.  That  bill  provided  for  a  tax  of  two  per  cent 
on  incomes  above  four  thousand  dollars.  A  separate  vote 
was  taken  on  this  section  and  I  voted  against  it.  It  was 
Republican  policy  then  to  oppose  an  income-tax,  and  the 
view  I  took  then  was,  that  if  we  started  out  taxing  incomes 
the  end  would  be  that  we  would  derive,  from  that  source, 
sufficient  amount  of  revenue  to  run  the  Government  and 
that  it  would  gradually  break  down  the  protective  policy. 
It  was  declared  unconstitutional  by  a  vote  of  five  to  four 
of  the  Supreme  Court.  A  previous  income-tax  had  been 
declared  constitutional  during  the  Civil  War,  and  I  am  very 
strongly  of  the  opinion  that  if  the  case  is  again  presented 
to  the  Court  the  decision  will  be  in  harmony  with  the  first  de 
cision,  overruling  the  decision  of  1895.  An  income-tax  is 
the  fairest  of  all  taxes.  It  is  resorted  to  by  every  other  na 
tion.  It  falls  most  heavily  on  those  who  can  best  afford  it. 
The  sentiment  in  the  Republican  party  has  changed,  and  I 
believe  that  at  no  far  distant  day  Congress  will  pass  an  in 
come-tax  as  well  as  an  inheritance-tax  law. 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     269 

The  passage  of  the  Wilson  Bill  increased,  rather  than 
diminished,  the  hard  times  commencing  with  the  panic  of 
1893.  The  Democratic  party,  or  the  free  silver  element  of 
it,  claimed  that  the  panacea  was  the  free  and  unlimited  coin 
age  of  silver  at  the  ratio  of  sixteen  to  one.  The  silver  ques 
tion  was  argued  week  after  week  in  both  branches  of  Con 
gress,  and  was  never  finally  settled  until  the  election  of  Mc- 
Kinley  and  the  establishment  by  law  of  the  Gold  Standard. 
In  recent  years  we  hear  very  little  about  free  silver ;  but  the 
Democratic  party  split  on  that  issue,  Mr.  Cleveland  heading 
the  faction  in  favor  of  sound  money. 

In  those  closing  days  of  the  Cleveland  Administra 
tion,  it  was  very  seldom  that  a  Democratic  Senator  was 
seen  at  the  White  House.  The  President  became  com 
pletely  estranged  from  the  members  of  his  party  in 
both  House  and  Senate,  but  it  seemed  to  bother  him  lit 
tle.  He  went  ahead  doing  his  duty  as  he  saw  it,  utterly 
disregarding  the  wishes  of  the  members  of  his  party  in 
Congress. 

I  saw  him  many  times  during  this  period,  and  I  remember 
on  one  occasion  I  had  seen  a  notice  in  one  of  the  papers  in 
dicating  that  the  President  was  about  to  appoint  my  old 
friend  Mr.  Charles  Ridgely,  of  Springfield,  Illinois,  as 
Comptroller  of  the  Currency.  I  had  the  highest  regard  for 
Mr.  Ridgely,  and  I  called  at  the  White  House  to  congratu 
late  the  President  on  the  selection.  He  seemed  to  be  out 
of  humor,  and  was  more  than  usually  abrupt.  He  declared 
that  he  knew  nothing  about  it,  that  he  did  not  know  Ridgely, 
and  never  had  had  any  intention  of  appointing  him.  I  re 
peated  that  I  had  seen  the  announcement  in  a  newspaper, 
adding  that  it  looked  to  me  as  though  the  report  were  au 
thentic,  and  that  I  only  wanted  to  congratulate  him.  But 
the  President  merely  reiterated,  somewhat  curtly,  that  he 


270     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

knew  nothing  about  it.  I  became  a  little  annoyed,  finally 
losing  my  temper. 

"I  don't  care  a  damn  whether  you  appoint  him  or  not," 
I  exclaimed;  "Ridgely  's  a  Democrat,  anyhow." 

Thereupon  his  attitude  quickly  changed,  and  he  inquired 
about  Ridgely,  listening  with  interest  to  what  I  had  to  say. 
He  then  talked  with  me  on  the  silver  question  and  other  mat 
ters,  detaining  me  while  he  kept  his  back  to  the  crowd  wait 
ing  to  see  him.  I  almost  had  to  break  away  in  order  to  give 
others  a  chance. 

Among  the  other  embarrassments  and  difficulties  of  the 
Cleveland  Administration  were  the  famous  Chicago  riots  of 
1893.  The  trouble  grew  out  of  a  railroad  strike;  much 
damage  was  done  and  a  great  deal  of  property  was  de 
stroyed,  with  consequent  loss  of  life.  The  city  itself  seemed 
to  be  threatened,  the  business  and  manufacturing  interests 
appealed  to  the  Governor  first,  and  then  to  the  President, 
to  send  troops  to  Chicago  to  protect  property.  When  the 
Governor  failed  to  act,  the  President  ordered  Federal 
troops  to  Chicago.  The  action  was  regarded  as  very  wise, 
and  it  endeared  him  to  the  business  people  of  that  city. 
Governor  Altgeld  protested,  and  that  was  one  of  the  reasons 
why  he  became  Mr.  Cleveland's  most  bitter  enemy. 

I  think  I  should  say  a  few  words  in  reference  to  Gov 
ernor  Altgeld.  He  has  been  called  an  anarchist  and  a  so 
cialist.  In  my  judgment,  he  was  neither.  Of  his  honesty, 
his  integrity,  his  sincerity  of  purpose,  his  determination  to 
give  the  State  a  good  administration,  I  never  had  the  slight 
est  doubt.  The  mainspring  of  the  trouble,  I  believe,  was  an 
inability  to  select  good  men  for  public  office.  He  was  not 
a  good  judge  of  men;  he  surrounded  himself  with  a  coterie 
that  betrayed  his  trust  and  used  the  State  offices  for  per 
sonal  gain.  I  have  always  sympathized  with  Governor  Alt- 


CLEVELAND'S  SECOND  TERM     271 

geld.  Had  he  been  eligible  I  believe  he  would  have  been 
the  nominee  of  his  party  for  the  Presidency ;  but  he  was  born 
abroad. 

One  can  scarcely  imagine  industrial  conditions  in  a  worse 
state  than  they  were  at  the  close  of  the  Cleveland  Adminis 
tration.  The  election  of  a  Republican  Congress  in  1894 
had  helped  some,  but  the  revenues  were  not  sufficient  to  meet 
the  ordinary  running  expenses  of  the  Government;  bonds 
had  to  be  issued,  labor  was  out  of  employment,  the  mills  and 
factories  were  closed,  and  business  was  at  a  standstill. 

This  was  the  condition  of  affairs  when  the  Republican 
National  Convention  assembled  in  1896. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY 
1896  TO  1901 

THE  hard  times,  the  business  depression,  all  attributable 
to  the  Wilson  Tariff  Bill,  made  the  Republicans  turn 
instinctively  to  Governor  McKinley,  the  well-known  advo 
cate  of  a  high  protective  tariff,  as  the  nominee  of  the  Re 
publican  party,  who  would  lead  it  to  victory  at  the  polls. 

The  Republican  National  Convention  of  1896  was  held  at 
St.  Louis.  It  was  one  of  the  few  national  conventions  which 
I  failed  to  attend.  Since  entering  the  Senate,  I  have  been 
usually  honored  by  my  party  colleagues  in  the  State  by  be 
ing  made  chairman  of  the  Illinois  delegation  to  Republican 
national  conventions.  But  for  some  reason  or  other  —  just 
why  I  do  not  now  recollect  —  I  was  not  a  delegate  to  the 
St.  Louis  Convention.  Congress  was  in  session  until  near 
the  time  when  the  convention  was  to  meet,  and  Mr.  McKin 
ley,  who,  it  was  well  known,  would  be  the  nominee  of  the 
party,  invited  me  to  stop  off  at  Canton  on  my  way  from 
Washington  to  Illinois  and  spend  a  day  with  him.  I  did  so, 
arriving  at  Canton  about  nine  in  the  morning,  Mr.  Mc 
Kinley  meeting  me  at  the  station  and  driving  me  to  his 
house,  where  I  remained  until  my  train  left  at  nine  in  the 
evening.  From  his  residence  in  Canton,  I  wired  the  Illi 
nois  delegation,  appealing  to  them  to  vote  for  McKinley. 
He  received  all  but  two  of  the  votes  of  the  delegation.  He 
was  nominated  without  any  serious  opposition,  through  the 

272 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  273 

brilliant  generalship  of  that  master  of  party  manipulation, 
the  Hon.  Marcus  A.  Hanna. 

I  was  talked  about  a  little  as  a  candidate  for  President 
during  the  closing  days  of  the  Cleveland  Administration.  I 
was  urged  to  lend  my  name  for  the  purpose,  particularly  by 
men  in  the  East  whom  I  always  regarded  as  my  friends. 
I  afterwards  learned,  although  I  was  not  so  informed  at  the 
time,  that  they  had  determined  to  beat  McKinley  at  all 
hazards  and  nominate  Speaker  Reed  if  they  could,  their 
policy  being  to  have  the  different  States  send  delegations  in 
favor  of  "favorite  sons."  Senator  Allison  was  selected  as 
the  "favorite  son"  from  Iowa,  and  efforts  were  made  to 
carry  the  Illinois  delegation  for  me.  They  hoped  by  this 
means,  when  the  delegates  assembled  at  St.  Louis,  to  agree 
on  some  one,  almost  any  one,  except  McKinley  —  Reed  if 
they  could,  or  Allison,  or  me. 

Mr.  McKinley,  through  friends,  about  this  time  offered 
me  all  sorts  of  inducements  to  withdraw.  Judge  Grosscup 
was  the  intermediary,  and  there  was  hardly  anything  in  the 
Administration,  or  hardly  any  promise,  he  would  not  have 
made  me  if  I  had  consented  to  withdraw.  I  felt  that  I  could 
not  do  so.  When  they  found  it  was  impossible  to  beg  me 
off  they  determined  to  carry  the  State  over  me.  Money 
was  spent  freely  in  characteristic  Hanna  fashion,  his  motto 
being,  "accomplish  results."  McKinley  was  exceedingly 
popular,  in  addition,  and  after  our  State  Convention  had 
assembled  and  endorsed  him,  I  withdrew  from  the  contest. 
At  the  time  I  thought  that  if  I  could  have  carried  the  dele 
gation  from  my  own  State,  as  Senator  Allison  did  his,  it 
would  have  broken  the  McKinley  boom,  and  one  or  the 
other  of  us  would  have  been  nominated.  But  as  I  look  back 
on  it  now,  it  seems  to  me  that  no  one  could  have  beaten  Mc 
Kinley  ;  and  even  if  he  had  lost  Illinois,  as  he  lost  Iowa,  he 

18 


274     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

still  would  have  had  sufficient  delegates  to  secure  his  nomi 
nation. 

The  McKinley  campaign  was  one  of  the  most  inter 
esting  and  quite  the  liveliest  in  which  I  have  ever  partici 
pated.  It  was  a  campaign  of  education  from  beginning  to 
end.  At  first  the  Republicans  tried  to  make  the  tariff  the 
issue,  and  in  a  sense  it  remained  one  of  the  most  important ; 
but  we  were  soon  compelled  to  accept  silver  as  the  issue, 
and  fight  it  out  on  that  line.  Silver  was  comparatively  a 
new  question ;  the  people  did  not  understand  it,  and  they  at 
tended  the  meetings,  listening  attentively  to  the  campaign 
speeches. 

There  was  considerable  satisfaction  in  speaking  during 
the  campaign  of  1896:  one  was  always  assured  of  a  large  and 
interested  audience.  In  addition  to  this,  the  prevailing  sen 
timent  was  one  of  cheerful  good-feeling;  and  while  there 
had  been  several  candidates  before  the  St.  Louis  Conven 
tion,  including  Speaker  Reed,  Senator  Allison,  and  Levi  P. 
Morton,  the  convention  left  no  bitterness  —  the  party  was 
united,  and  every  Republican  did  his  full  duty.  Southern 
Illinois  was  a  little  uncertain ;  but  it  finally  came  around,  and 
the  full  Republican  vote  was  cast  for  McKinley  and  Hobart. 

I  took  a  very  active  part  in  this  campaign.  Mr.  Mc 
Kinley  was  exceedingly  polite  to  me  and  invited  Senator 
Thurston  and  me  to  open  the  campaign  in  Canton,  which  in 
vitation  I  accepted,  addressing  there  a  vast  audience.  It 
was  said  that  some  fifty  or  seventy-five  thousand  people 
were  assembled  there  that  day.  Subsequently  I  spoke  in 
Kentucky  and  Michigan,  and  made  a  thorough  campaign  in 
my  own  State. 

While  the  Republicans  were  united,  the  Democrats  were 
hopelessly  divided.  The  so-called  Gold  Democrats  held  a 
convention  and  nominated  my  colleague,  Senator  Palmer, 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  275 

and  General  Buckner  as  its  candidates  for  President  and 
Vice-President  respectively.  They  did  not  receive  a  very 
large  vote,  because  I  believe  they  advised  the  Gold  Demo 
crats  to  vote  for  McKinley.  The  Gold  Democrats  had 
great  influence  in  the  election.  General  Palmer  was  thor 
oughly  in  earnest  on  the  silver  question,  more  so  perhaps 
than  any  Democrat  whom  I  knew.  He  believed  strongly 
in  the  Democratic  doctrine  on  the  tariff,  and  was  a  Democrat 
on  every  other  issue;  but  he  could  not  follow  his  party  in 
espousing  free  silver. 

There  was  doubt  all  the  time  over  the  result  of  the  elec 
tion.  After  the  Democratic  convention  was  held  in  Chi 
cago,  and  in  the  early  Summer  and  Fall,  the  Democrats 
certainly  seemed  to  have  the  best  of  it;  but  later  in  the  cam 
paign,  as  the  people  became  educated,  it  began  to  look 
brighter.  I  was  very  much  surprised  at  the  result,  how 
ever.  McKinley  carried  the  election  by  a  vote  of  7,111,000 
as  against  6,509,000  for  Mr.  Bryan,  and  the  electoral  vote 
by  271  as  against  176  for  Mr.  Bryan. 

When  President  McKinley  was  inaugurated  I  cannot 
forget  the  expression  of  apparent  relief  in  President  Cleve 
land's  face,  as  he  accompanied  his  successor  to  the  ceremony. 
He  seemed  rejoiced  that  he  was  turning  his  great  office  over 
to  Mr.  McKinley.  The  last  days  of  his  Administration  had 
been  troublesome  ones.  Estranged  from  his  own  party,  war 
clouds  appearing  in  the  near  distance, —  I  do  not  wonder  that 
he  gladly  relinquished  the  office. 

Mr.  McKinley  came  into  office  under  the  most  favor 
able  circumstances.  A  Congress  was  elected  fully  in  har- 
nony  with  him,  whose  members  gladly  acknowledged  him  as 
lot  only  the  titular,  but  the  real  head  of  the  Republican 
party.  We  have  never  had  a  President  who  had  more  in 
fluence  with  Congress  than  Mr.  McKinley.  Even  Presi- 


276     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

dent  Lincoln  had  difficulties  with  the  leaders  of  Congress  in 
his  day,  but  I  have  never  heard  of  even  the  slightest  friction 
between  Mr.  McKinley.  and  the  party  leaders  in  Senate  and 
House.  J 

In  many  respects,  President  McKinley  was  a  very  great 
man.  He  looked  and  acted  the  ideal  President.  He  was 
always  thoroughly  self -poised  and  deliberate;  nothing  ever 
seemed  to  excite  him,  and  he  always  maintained  a  proper 
dignity.  He  had  the  natural  talent  and  make-up  to  be  suc 
cessful  in  a  marked  degree  in  dealing  with  people  with 
whom  he  came  into  contact.  He  grew  in  popular  favor 
from  the  day  of  his  election  until  his  death,  and  I  have  al 
ways  maintained  that  he  would  go  down  in  history  as  our 
most  popular  President  among  all  classes  of  people  in  all 
sections  of  the  country.  His  long  training  in  public  life  — 
his  service  as  a  member  of  the  House  and  Governor  of  Ohio 
—  had  well  fitted  him  for  the  high  office  of  President.  He 
had  many  favorites  whom  he  desired  to  get  into  office;  and 
on  many  occasions,  instead  of  going  ahead  and  appointing 
his  friends  without  consulting  any  one,  he  asked  me  if  I 
would  have  any  objection  to  his  appointing  some  personal 
friend  living  in  Illinois  to  one  office  or  another  in  or  out  of 
the  State.  I  always  yielded;  in  fact  it  was  impossible  to 
resist  him. 

Illustrating  this,  there  happened  to  be  a  vacancy  in  a  Fed 
eral  Judgeship  in  Chicago.  Presidents  usually  have  se 
lected  their  own  judges  regardless  of  Senatorial  recom 
mendation,  and  McKinley  selected  his;  but  he  managed  to 
secure  Senatorial  recommendation  at  the  same  time.  I  was 
in  favor  of  the  appointment  of  a  certain  lawyer  in  Chicago 
whom  I  regarded  as  thoroughly  well  qualified  for  the  place, 
and  the  President  wanted  to  appoint  Judge  Christian  C. 
Kohlsaat.  My  colleague  and  I  insisted  for  a  long  time  on 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  277 

our  recommendation.  The  President  and  I  debated  the 
question  frequently,  he  always  listening  to  me  and  seeming 
impressed  with  what  I  had  to  say,  at  the  same  time  remain 
ing  fully  determined  to  have  his  own  way  in  the  end.  Fi 
nally,  when  I  was  in  the  executive  office  one  day,  he  came 
over  to  where  I  was  and,  putting  his  arm  on  my  shoulder, 
said:  "Senator,  you  won't  get  mad  at  me  if  I  appoint  Judge 
Kohlsaat,  will  you?  "  I  replied:  "Mr.  President,  I  could  not 
get  mad  at  you  if  I  were  to  try."  He  sent  the  nomination 
in;  Judge  Kohlsaat  was  confirmed,  and  is  now  serving  on 
the  United  States  Circuit  Bench. 

Mr.  McKinley  wanted  to  appoint  his  old  friend  and  com 
mander,  General  Powell,  as  Collector  of  Internal  Revenue 
at  East  St.  Louis.  I  did  not  want  General  Powell  to  have 
the  office,  as  I  did  not  believe  he  had  rendered  any  service  to 
the  party  sufficient  to  justify  giving  him  one  of  the  general 
Federal  offices  in  the  State.  State  Senator  P.  T.  Chapman, 
who  has  since  been  elected  to  Congress  several  times,  and 
Hon.  James  A.  Willoughby,  then  a  member  of  the  Illinois 
State  Senate,  were  both  candidates,  and  I  should  have  been 
very  glad  to  have  had  either  one  of  them  appointed. 

Chapman  came  to  Washington  to  my  office,  where  he 
waited  while  I  went  to  the  White  House  to  attempt  to  have 
the  matter  of  the  appointment  settled.  I  saw  the  Presi 
dent,  to  whom  I  expressed  a  willingness  to  have  the  post  of 
Collector  of  Internal  Revenue  for  the  East  St.  Louis  Dis 
trict  go  either  to  Chapman  or  Willoughby. 

"Cullom,"  returned  the  President,  "if  you  had  come  to  me 
this  way  in  the  first  place,  and  urged  me  to  appoint  one  of 
them,  I  would  have  done  it ;  but  you  have  waited  until  every 
thing  is  filled,  and  now  I  must  either  appoint  Powell  to  this 
place,  or  turn  him  out  to  grass."  He  continued:  "I  was  a 
boy  when  I  entered  the  army,  and  General  Powell  took  me 


278     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

under  his  wing ;  he  looked  after  me,  and  I  became  very  much 
attached  to  him.  I  was  standing  only  a  little  way  off  and 
saw  him  shot  through."  The  tears  came  to  the  President's 
eyes  and  ran  down  his  cheeks.  When  I  saw  with  what  feel 
ing  he  regarded  the  matter,  I  threw  up  my  hands. 

"I  am  through,"  said  I ;  "I  have  nothing  more  to  say." 
General  Powell  was  given  the  office.     This  illustrates  the 
manner  in  which  Mr.  McKinley  always  managed  to  get  his 
own  way  in  the  matter  of  appointments  without  the  slight 
est  friction  with  Senators  and  Representatives. 

During  the  early  days  of  his  Administration  I  did  not  feel 
so  close  to  him  as  I  had  felt  toward  some  of  his  predecessors. 
I  did  not  feel  that  he  quite  forgave  my  not  yielding  to  him 
and  declining  to  become  a  candidate  for  President  in  1896. 
He  was  always  polite  to  me,  as  he  was  to  every  one,  yet  I 
could  not  but  feel  that  he  was  holding  me  at  arm's  length. 
My  colleague,  Senator  Mason,  who  was  an  old  friend  of  his, 
had  secured  a  number  of  appointments,  and  the  President 
himself  was  constantly  asking  me  to  yield  to  the  appoint 
ment  of  this  or  that  "original  McKinley  man,"  mostly  either 
my  enemies  or  men  of  whom  I  knew  nothing.  I  was  much 
out  of  humor  about  it,  and,  several  consular  appointments 
having  been  made  about  that  time,  I  wrote  some  one  in  the 
State  a  letter  setting  forth  that  those  appointments  wrere 
but  the  carrying  out  of  promises  made  in  advance  of  Mc- 
Kinley's  nomination.  This  letter,  or  a  copy  of  it,  was  sent 
to  the  President.  I  called  at  the  White  House  one  day  con 
cerning  the  appointment  of  some  man,  whose  name  I  do 
not  remember,  but  whom  I  regarded  as  my  personal  en 
emy.  I  told  him  I  had  no  objection,  but  that  I  regarded 
the  man  as  a  jackass.  McKinley  evidently  did  not  like  my 
remark  very  well;  he  reached  back  on  his  table,  pulled  out 
this  letter,  or  a  copy  of  it,  and  asked  me  if  I  had  written  it. 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  279 

I  replied  that  I  did  not  know  whether  I  had  or  not,  but  that 
it  sounded  very  much  as  I  felt  at  the  moment.  He  said 
that  he  had  not  expected  an  expression  of  that  sort  from  me. 
Whereupon  we  had  a  general  overhauling,  in  the  course  of 
which  I  told  him  with  considerable  feeling  that  I  had  been 
more  or  less  intimate  with  every  President  since,  and  includ 
ing,  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  had  always  been  treated  frankly  and 
not  held  at  arm's  length;  but  with  himself  that  I  had  been 
constantly  made  to  feel  that  he  was  reserved  with  me.  We 
quarrelled  about  it  a  little,  and  finally  he  asked  me  what  I 
wanted  done.  I  told  him.  He  promptly  promised  to  do  it, 
and  did. 

That  quarrel  cleared  the  atmosphere,  and  we  remained  de 
voted  friends  from  that  day  until  his  death. 

Had  it  not  been  for  the  Hon.  Marcus  A.  Hanna,  Mr.  Mc- 
Kinley  would  probably  never  have  been  nominated  or  elected 
President  of  the  United  States. 

I  knew  Mr.  Hanna  very  many  years  before  he  became 
identified  with  the  late  President  McKinley.  He  always 
took  an  interest  in  Republican  politics,  particularly  in  Ohio 
politics ;  and  when  Mr.  Elaine  was  a  candidate  for  the  Pres 
idency,  and  I  was  campaigning  in  Ohio,  I  rode  with  Mr. 
Hanna  from  Canton  to  Massillon,  some  seven  or  eight  miles 
distant,  where  a  great  meeting  was  held,  with  Mr.  Elaine  as 
the  central  figure.  I  was  even  then  very  much  impressed 
with  Mr.  Hanna  as  a  man  of  the  very  soundest  judgment  and 
common  sense. 

But  it  was  not  until  Mr.  McKinley  became  a  candidate 
for  President  that  Hanna  took  a  very  great  interest  in  na 
tional  political  affairs.  He  had  the  deepest  affection  for 
the  late  President,  and  was  determined  that  he  should  be 
nominated  and  elected  President  of  the  United  States,  at 


280     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

whatever  cost.  Mr.  Hanna  took  hold  of  Mr.  McKinley's 
campaign  for  the  nomination  and  controlled  it  absolutely, 
and,  to  use  the  common  expression,  he  "ran  every  other  can 
didate  off  the  track." 

He  came  into  Illinois  and  carried  the  State  easily.  He 
was  not  sparing  in  the  use  of  money,  but  believed  in  using  it 
legitimately  in  accomplishing  results. 

It  must  have  been  a  great  satisfaction  to  him  when  the  St. 
Louis  Convention  nominated  his  candidate,  William  Mc- 
Kinley,  of  Ohio,  on  the  first  ballot  by  a  vote  of  661  as  against 
84  votes  for  Thomas  B.  Reed,  of  Maine,  the  next  highest 
candidate.  He  had  it  all  organized  so  perfectly  that  the  St. 
Louis  Convention  was  perfunctory  so  far  as  Mr.  McKinley's 
nomination  was  concerned.  The  Convention  recognized  that 
it  was  Mr.  Hanna  who  had  achieved  this  great  triumph ;  and 
after  Senator  Lodge,  Governor  Hastings,  and  Senators 
Platt  and  Depew  had  moved  that  the  nomination  of  Mr. 
McKinley  be  made  unanimous,  a  general  call  was  made  for 
Mr.  Hanna.  He  finally  yielded  in  a  very  brief  address. 


"MR.  CHAIRMAN  AND  GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  CONVENTION:  —  I  am 
there  was  one  member  of  this  Convention  who  has  had  the  intelligence  at 
this  late  hour  to  ascertain  how  this  nomination  was  made  —  by  the  people. 
What  feeble  effort  I  may  have  contributed  to  the  result,  I  am  here  to 
lay  the  fruits  of  it  at  the  feet  of  my  party  and  upon  the  altar  of  my 
country.  I  am  now  ready  to  take  my  position  in  the  ranks  alongside 
of  my  friend,  General  Henderson,  and  all  good  Republicans  from  every 
State,  and  do  the  duty  of  a  soldier  until  next  November." 

Naturally,  Mr.  Hanna  was  made  chairman  of  the  Re 
publican  National  Committee,  and  as  such  conducted  Mr. 
McKinley 's  campaign  for  election  just  as  he  had  conducted 
the  preliminary  campaign  for  the  nomination.  He  there 
showed  the  shrewdest  tact  and  ability  in  its  management, 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  281 

and  many  people  believe  that  he  elected  McKinley  very 
largely  by  his  own  efforts. 

I  do  not  know  whether  Mr.  Hanna  was  very  ambitious  to 
enter  the  Senate  or  not,  but  I  do  believe  that  Mr.  McKinley 
saw  that  he  would  be  probably  the  most  useful  Senator  to 
his  Administration;  and  he  contrived  to  make  a  vacancy  in 
the  Senatorship  from  Ohio  by  inducing  John  Sherman  to 
accept  the  position  of  Secretary  of  State  in  his  Cabinet, 
thereby  making  a  place  for  Mr.  Hanna  in  the  Senate.  Sen 
ator  Sherman  resigned  to  enter  the  State  Department;  and 
on  March  5,  1897,  Mr.  Hanna  was  appointed  by  Governor 
Bushnell  to  fill  the  vacancy. 

From  the  very  first  Mr.  Hanna  took  rank  as  one  of  the 
foremost  leaders  of  the  Senate.  Of  course,  he  had  every 
thing  in  his  favor.  He  had  nominated  and  elected  McKin 
ley ;  he  had  been  Chairman  of  the  Republican  National  Com 
mittee,  and  it  was  known  that  he  stood  closer  to  the  Presi 
dent  than  any  other  man  in  public  life. 

But  notwithstanding  this,  he  had  the  real  ability  naturally 
to  assume  his  place  as  a  leader.  He  assumed  a  prominent 
place  more  rapidly  than  any  Senator  whom  I  have  ever 
known.  He  took  hold  of  legislation  with  a  degree  of  skill 
and  confidence  that  was  remarkable,  and  carried  his  meas 
ures  through  apparently  by  his  own  individual  efforts  and 
energy.  He  changed  the  whole  attitude  of  the  Senate  con 
cerning  the  route  for  an  interoceanic  canal.  We  all  gen 
erally  favored  the  Nicaraguan  route.  Senator  Hanna  be 
came  convinced  that  the  Panama  route  was  best,  and  he  soon 
carried  everything  before  him  to  the  end  that  the  Panama 
route  was  selected. 

During  the  first  McKinley  campaign,  Mark  Hanna  was 
probably  the  most  caricatured  man  in  public  life.  He  was 


282     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

made  an  issue  in  that  campaign  and  was  usually  pictured  as 
being  covered  with  money-bags  and  dollars.  But  it  is  very 
strange  how  public  sentiment  changed  concerning  him.  Be 
fore  the  first  McKinley  Administration  was  over,  Mark 
Hanna  enjoyed  quite  a  degree  of  popularity;  but  it  was  not 
until  he  entered  the  campaign  of  1900  that  he  really  became 
one  of  the  popular  figures  in  American  politics. 

Some  one,  I  do  not  know  who,  induced  him  to  go  among 
the  people  and  show  himself,  and  try  to  make  some  speeches. 
His  first  few  efforts  were  so  successful  that  it  was  deter 
mined  he  should  make  a  speech-making  tour.  Senator 
Frye,  of  Maine,  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  experienced  and 
finest  orators  in  the  country,  accompanied  him  on  his  tour. 
Senator  Frye  told  me  he  prevailed  upon  Senator  Hanna  to 
make  short  campaign  speeches  first.  He  requested  him  to 
try  a  fifteen-minute  speech,  then  extend  them  to  thirty  min 
utes.  Before  their  tour  was  ended,  he  was  making  just 
as  long  and  just  as  good  a  speech  as  any  old  expe 
rienced  campaigner.  During  this  campaign,  there  were 
more  calls  on  the  Republican  National  Committee  for  Sen 
ator  Hanna  than  there  were  for  any  other  campaign 
speaker.  Everywhere  he  went  he  made  friends,  not  only 
for  President  McKinley,  the  nominee  of  the  party,  but  for 
himself  as  well.  Mark  Hanna  became  one  of  the  most  pop 
ular  leaders  in  the  Republican  party,  and  I  have  never  for 
a  moment  doubted  that  he  could  have  been  the  nominee  of 
the  party  for  the  Presidency  in  1904,  had  he  consented  to 
accept  it.  He  told  me  in  a  private  conversation  his  ambi 
tion  had  been  gratified  when  he  had  seen  his  great  personal 
friend,  Mr.  McKinley,  twice  elected  President  of  the  United 
States,  and  now  that  he  had  passed  away  he  had  no  particular 
ambition  on  his  own  account. 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  28a 

Mr.  McKinley  promptly  proceeded  to  call  a  special  ses 
sion  of  Congress,  which  convened  March  15,  1897,  and  in 
which  Mr.  Reed  was  elected  Speaker  of  the  House.  This 
session  was  called  for  the  purpose  of  enacting  a  law  for  the 
raising  of  sufficient  revenue  to  carry  on  the  Government; 
and  on  March  31  the  Dingley  Bill  passed  the  House.  The 
bill  was  debated  in  the  Senate  for  several  weeks,  and  after 
eight  hundred  and  seventy-two  amendments  were  incorpo 
rated,  it  passed  the  Senate  July  7,  1897.  The  conference  re 
port  was  agreed  to,  and  the  act  was  approved  July  24,  1897. 
The  country  was  in  such  condition  then  that  we  heard  no  com 
plaint  concerning  the  high  protective  tariff.  The  Republi 
cans  were  united  in  advocating  such  a  protective  tariff  as 
would  enable  the  mills  and  factories  to  open,  thereby  af 
fording  employment  and  restoring  prosperity. 

From  the  election  of  President  McKinley  and  the  enact 
ment  of  the  Dingley  Law  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  we  can 
date  the  greatest  era  of  prosperity,  and  the  greatest  mate 
rial  advancement,  of  any  period  of  like  duration  in  our  his 
tory. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  Cleveland  Administration  and  all 
during  the  first  part  of  the  McKinley  Administration,  con 
ditions  were  leading  up  inevitably  to  the  Spanish -American 
War.  The  enthusiasm  of  some  Senators,  especially  Senator 
Proctor,  of  Vermont,  and  my  own  colleague,  Senator  Mason, 
of  Illinois,  became  so  intense  that  war  was  brought  on  be 
fore  the  country  was  really  prepared  for  it.  Mr.  McKinley 
held  back.  He  knew  the  horrors  of  war  and,  if  he  could 
avoid  it,  did  not  desire  to  see  his  country  engage  in  hostilities 
with  any  other  country.  He  acted  with  great  discretion, 
holding  things  steadily  until  some  degree  of  preparation 
was  made ;  and  I  have  no  doubt  at  all  that  the  war  would  have 


284     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

been  averted  had  not  the  Maine  been  destroyed  in  Havana 
harbor.  The  country  forced  us  into  it  after  that  appalling 
catastrophe. 

The  entire  Nation  stood  behind  the  President,  and  so  did 
Congress.  One  of  the  most  dignified  and  impressive  scenes  I 
ever  witnessed  since  I  became  a  member  of  the  Senate  was 
the  passage  of  the  bill  appropriating  fifty  million  dollars  to 
be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  President,  in  order  to 
carry  on  the  war.  The  Committee  on  Appropriations,  of 
which  I  had  long  been  a  member,  directed  Senator  Hale  to 
report  the  bill.  It  was  agreed  in  committee  that  we  should 
endeavor  to  secure  its  passage  without  a  single  speech  for  or 
against  it.  Some  of  the  Senators  who  seemed  disposed  to 
talk,  were  prevailed  upon  to  desist,  and  it  was  passed  without 
any  speeches.  The  ayes  and  nays  were  called,  and  amid  the 
most  solemn  silence  the  bill  was  passed.  The  galleries  were 
crowded;  a  great  many  members  of  the  House  were  on  the 
floor,  and  it  reminded  me  of  the  days  when  the  great  Recon 
struction  legislation  was  being  enacted,  in  the  sixties.  It 
was  a  demonstration  to  the  country  and  the  world  of  our  con 
fidence  in  the  President,  and  the  determination  on  the  part  of 
Congress  to  do  what  was  necessary  to  uphold  the  dignity  and 
honor  of  the  United  States.  The  vote  for  the  bill  in  the 
Senate  was  unanimous. 

The  war  came  on  immediately  afterwards.  The  history  of 
it  is  yet  too  fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  people  to  need  repetition 
here.  It  was  soon  over,  and  with  its  conclusion  came  new 
and  greater  responsibilities.  Whether  it  was  wise  for  the 
United  States  to  assume  these  new  responsibilities,  I  am  not 
prepared  to  say.  Time  alone  can  determine  that. 

I  have  always  had  great  sympathy  for  General  Russell  A. 
Alger,  of  Michigan,  who  was  in  President  McKinley's 
Cabinet  as  Secretary  of  War.  It  was  not  his  fault  that  con- 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  285 

ditions  in  the  War  Department  were  as  they  existed  in  1897, 
when  he  assumed  office.  We  must  remember  that  the  coun 
try  had  enjoyed  a  continuous  period  of  peace  from  1865  to 
1898.  We  were  unprepared  for  war,  and  in  the  scramble  and 
haste  the  Department  of  War  was  not  administered  satisfac 
torily,  the  whole  blame  being  laid  upon  General  Alger.  It 
had  been  the  policy  of  the  Democratic  party  in  Congress  to 
oppose  liberal  appropriations  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
War  Department  and  Army.  Many  Republicans  thought 
that  the  best  means  of  limiting  appropriations  was  in  cutting 
down  the  estimates  for  the  War  Department.  They  seemed 
to  think  that  we  would  never  again  engage  in  a  foreign 
war. 

General  Alger  was  a  thoroughly  honest  man,  of  whose  in 
tegrity  I  never  had  any  doubt.  He  was  made  the  scapegoat, 
and  President  McKinley  practically  was  forced  by  public 
sentiment  to  demand  his  resignation.  Personally,  I  have  al 
ways  believed  the  President  should  have  stood  by  General 
Alger.  I  was  much  gratified  when  his  own  people  in  Michi 
gan  showed  their  confidence  in  him,  very  soon  after  he  was 
forced  out  of  the  McKinley  Cabinet,  by  electing  him  to  a 
seat  in  the  United  States  Senate  made  vacant  by  the  death 
of  the  late  Senator  McMillan. 

During  his  Administration,  President  McKinley  did  me 
quite  an  honor  by  appointing  me  chairman  of  a  commission  to 
visit  the  Hawaiian  Islands,  investigate  conditions  there,  and 
report  a  form  of  government  for  those  islands.  He  ap 
pointed  with  me  my  colleague,  Senator  Morgan  of  Alabama, 
and  my  friend  the  Hon.  R.  R.  Hitt,  chairman  of  the  House 
Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs.  In  all  my  public  life  this 
was  the  second  executive  appointment  that  I  ever  received, 
the  first  being  from  President  Lincoln  during  the  Civil  War, 


286     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

to  investigate  commissary  and  quartermasters'  accounts,  to 
which  I  have  already  referred. 

It  had  been  the  well-known  policy  of  the  United  States  for 
many  years  that  in  no  event  could  the  entity  of  Hawaiian 
statehood  cease  by  the  passage  of  the  islands  under  the  dom 
ination  or  influence  of  another  power  than  the  United  States. 
Their  annexation  came  about  as  the  natural  result  of  the 
strengthening  of  the  ties  that  bound  us  to  those  islands  for 
many  years.  The  people  had  overthrown  the  monarchy  and 
set  up  a  republic.  It  seemed  certain  that  the  republic  could 
not  long  exist,  and  they  appealed  to  the  United  States  for  an 
nexation.  The  treaty  of  annexation  was  negotiated  and 
then  ratified  by  Hawaii,  but  it  was  withdrawn  by  President 
Cleveland  before  the  Senate  acted  upon  it ;  finally,  the  islands 
were  annexed  by  the  passage  of  an  act  of  Congress  during 
the  McKinley  Administration. 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  Senator  Morgan, 
Mr.  Hitt,  and  I  visited  the  islands.  The  appointment  came 
about  in  this  way.  I  had  been  urging  the  President  to  ap 
point  Mr.  Rheuna  Lawrence,  of  Springfield,  Illinois,  as  one 
of  the  commissioners.  The  Hon.  James  A.  Connolly,  then 
representing  the  Springfield  district  in  Congress,  had  also 
been  very  active  in  trying  to  secure  Lawrence's  appoint 
ment.  He  came  to  me  in  the  Senate  one  day  and  told  me 
that  there  was  no  chance  of  Lawrence  being  appointed  and 
that  the  President  had  determined  to  appoint  me.  I  told 
Connolly  I  did  not  see  how  I  could  accept  an  appointment, 
under  the  circumstances,  and  that  Lawrence  might  misunder 
stand  it.  Connolly  said  he  thought  I  must  take  the  place. 
The  President  himself  afterwards  talked  with  me  about  it. 
I  hesitated.  He  urged  me,  insisting  that  I  could  not  very 
well  afford  to  decline.  Finally  I  said  that  if  he  insisted,  I 
would  accept.  He  nominated  us  to  the  Senate  for  confirma- 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  287 

tion.  This  precipitated  considerable  debate  in  the  Senate, 
for,  by  the  members  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  the 
appointment  of  Senators  and  members  on  such  a  commission 
was  regarded  as  unconstitutional;  but  the  committee  deter 
mined  to  take  no  action  on  the  nominations  at  all,  so  we  were 
neither  confirmed  nor  rejected.  President  McKinley  urged 
us  to  go  ahead,  however,  visit  the  islands,  and  make  our  re 
port,  which  we  did.  This  was  the  beginning  of  expansion, 
or  Imperialism,  in  the  campaign  of  1900. 

One  writer,  in  speaking  of  the  acquisition  of  these  islands, 
said: 

"One  of  the  brightest  episodes  in  American  history  was  the  acquisition 
of  the  Hawaiian  Islands,  and  Senator  Cullom's  name  is  prominently 
associated  with  that  act.  He  read  aright  our  history  as  a  nation  of  ex 
pansionists.  He  was  not  afraid  to  permit  the  great  republic  to  become 
greater.  He  deemed  it  wise  that  to  the  lines  of  our  influence  on  land 
should  be  added  a  national  influence  on  the  seas.  This  view  was  ac 
cepted  by  the  people  and  by  the  national  Legislature.  ?  By  President 
McKinley,  Senator  Cullom  was  appointed  chairman  of  the  Hawaiian 
Commission,  composed  of  Senator  Morgan  of  Alabama,  and  Congressman 
Hitt  of  Illinois,  and  Senator  Cullom,  to  visit  the  islands  and  frame  a 
new  law  providing  for  their  civil  government  and  denning  their  future 
relations  with  the  United  States.  Since  the  days  of  Clyde  in  India, 
few  men  have  been  clothed  with  a  more  important  duty  than  this  com 
mission,  whose  mission  it  was  to  prepare  a  Government  for  the  Hawaiian 
Islands.  The  bill  recommended  by  the  commission  was  enacted  by  Con 
gress,  and  stands  as  the  organic  law  of  the  islands  to-day." 

We  had  an  exceedingly  interesting  time  in  the  Hawaiian 
Islands.  They  were  not  known  so  well  then  as  they  are  to 
day,  We  visited  several  of  the  islands  composing  the  group, 
and  publicly  explained  our  mission.  The  people  seemed  to 
have  the  impression  that  American  occupancy  of  the  islands 
was  only  temporary,  and  that  as  soon  as  the  Spanish- Ameri 
can  War  was  over  they  would  return  to  old  conditions.  We 


288     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

told  them  that  annexation  was  permanent,  and  they  would 
remain  a  part  of  the  United  States  for  all  time  to  come.  I 
did  not  favor  giving  them  statehood.  There  was  not  a  suf 
ficient  number  of  whites  and  educated  natives  to  justify  giv 
ing  them  the  franchise  as  an  independent  State  in  the  Ameri 
can  Union.  Senator  Morgan  and  I  differed  on  this  a  great 
deal,  and  on  several  occasions  in  the  hearings  of  the  commis 
sion,  he  stated  that  they  were  to  become  a  State.  I  always 
interposed  to  the  effect  that,  so  far  as  my  influence  was  con 
cerned,  they  would  remain  a  Territory. 

There  was  one  island  of  the  group  called  Molokai  devoted 
entirely  to  the  care  of  lepers,  leprosy  being  quite  common 
in  the  Hawaiian  Islands.  We  deemed  it  our  duty  to  visit  this 
island  as  well  as  the  others.  It  was  one  of  the  most  interest 
ing  and  pathetic  places  of  which  the  human  mind  can  con 
ceive  —  a  place  of  grim  tragedies.  There  were  about  twelve 
hundred  lepers  on  the  island,  divided  into  two  colonies,  one  at 
each  end  of  the  island.  The  island  itself  forms  a  natural 
fortress  from  which  escape  is  almost  impossible,  the  sea  on 
one  side  and  mountains  on  the  other.  We  spent  the  day 
there  and  ate  luncheon  on  the  island.  We  saw  the  disease  in 
all  its  stages.  We  entered  a  schoolhouse  in  which  there  were 
a  crowd  of  young  girls  ranging  from  ten  to  sixteen  years  of 
age.  They  were  all  lepers.  They  sang  for  us.  It  was 
very  pathetic.  We  visited  the  cemetery  and  saw  the  monu 
ment  erected  to  the  memory  of  a  Catholic  priest,  Father 
Damien,  who  went  there  from  Chicago,  to  devote  his  life  to 
the  spiritual  care  of  the  unfortunates,  but  who,  like  all  others 
residing  on  the  island,  finally  succumbed  to  the  disease.  We 
met  an  old  lady  at  the  cemetery  and  I  asked  her  if  there  was 
any  danger  of  contracting  the  disease.  She  said  there  was 
not  unless  we  had  some  abrasions  on  the  skin,  and  advised 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  289 

us  as  a  matter  of  caution  to  wear  gloves.  I  promptly  put 
mine  on  and  kept  them  on  until  I  left  the  island. 

I  was  told  that  they  expected  me  to  speak  to  them,  and  I 
did  make  them  a  speech.  A  large  number  of  them  assembled. 
I  have  addressed  many  audiences  in  my  life,  but  this  was  the 
queerest  I  was  ever  obliged  to  face.  There  were  men  and 
women  in  all  stages  of  the  disease.  Leprosy  attacks  the 
fingers  and  they  fall  off,  and  some  natural  instinct  prompts 
the  victim  to  hide  his  hands ;  but  as  my  speech  was  translated 
to  them,  in  the  excitement  they  would  forget  and  throw  out 
their  hands  and  applaud.  It  was  a  hideous  sight  and  I  most 
fervently  wish  never  to  see  the  like  of  it  again. 

For  our  expenses  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  had  been 
appropriated.  I  am  not  one  of  those  who  believe  in  lavish 
expenditures  of  public  money  by  commissions.  While  I  was 
willing  as  chairman  of  the  commission  to  permit  travelling 
expenses  and  the  reasonable  necessaries  and  probably  the 
luxuries  of  life  while  abroad,  yet  I  differed  with  my  col 
league,  Senator  Morgan,  and  insisted  that  no  money  should 
be  spent  for  entertaining.  Out  of  the  hundred  thousand 
dollars  we  spent  something  like  fifteen  thousand ;  and  Sena 
tor  Morgan,  Mr.  Hitt,  and  I  agreed  that  it  would  not  be 
lawful  or  right  for  us  to  accept  any  compensation  for  our 
services  as  members  of  the  commission.  Something  like 
eighty-five  thousand  dollars  reverted  to  the  Treasury. 

We  returned  and  made  our  report  to  Congress,  and  the 
bill  which  we  recommended  was  enacted.  I  do  not  think  the 
present  form  of  government  of  Hawaii  will  be  changed  for 
many  years  to  come.  I  have  regretted  exceedingly  that, 
despite  the  repeated  recommendations  of  Presidents  McKin- 
ley  and  Roosevelt,  Congress  has  not  seen  fit  to  make  an  ap 
propriation  to  improve  the  harbor  and  fortify  the  islands. 


290     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

It  is  true  they  afford  us  a  coaling  station  in  the  middle  of  the 
Pacific,  but  that  is  all.  Should  hostilities  break  out  in  the 
Far  East,  our  country  being  a  party,  it  would  be  almost  im 
possible  for  us  to  defend  them,  and  they  would  become  easy 
prey  to  foreign  aggression.  'I  hope  that  this  policy  will 
change  in  the  near  future,  and  that  Pearl  Harbor  will  be 
improved  and  the  islands  fortified. 

The  important  events  of  the  first  McKinley  Administra 
tion  were  the  enactment  of  the  Dingley  Tariff,  the  success 
ful  conclusion  of  the  war  with  Spain,  the  ratification  of  the 
Treaty  of  Peace,  the  independence  of  Cuba,  and  the  acquisi 
tion  of  Porto  Rico,  the  Philippines,  and  the  Island  of  Guam ; 
the  establishment  of  the  gold  standard  by  law,  and  the  an 
nexation  of  the  Hawaiian  Islands. 

At  the  close  of  the  Administration  no  one  questioned  that 
the  country  was  in  a  more  prosperous  condition  than  it  ever 
had  been  before,  and  that  McKinley  was  probably  the  most 
popular  President  that  ever  occupied  the  White  House. 
He  was  unanimously  nominated  at  the  Republican  Conven 
tion,  at  Philadelphia,  for  a  second  term. 

The  campaign  of  1900  was  fought  out  on  the  issue  of 
Imperialism;  the  tariff  was  almost  forgotten,  and  the  silver 
question  was  only  discussed  incidentally. 

Mr.  McKinley's  popular  vote  was  not  much  greater  than 
it  was  in  1896.  He  received  7,207,000  as  against  6,358,000 
votes  cast  for  Mr.  Bryan. 

During  the  short  session  which  convened  after  his  reelec 
tion,  the  Platt  amendment  concerning  our  future  relations 
with  Cuba  was  passed.  The  War  Revenue  Act  was  reduced. 
It  was  an  uneventful  session,  and  Mr.  McKinley  was  again 
inaugurated  March  4,  1901. 


MCKINLEY'S  PRESIDENCY  291 

On  September  6,  1901,  the  President  attended  the  Buffalo 
Exposition,  accompanied  by  Mrs.  McKinley  and  the  mem 
bers  of  his  cabinet,  and  during  the  reception  which  he  held  at 
the  Temple  of  Music  on  that  day,  he  was  shot  and  wounded 
by  an  assassin,  one  Leon  F.  Czolgosz.  After  lingering  along 
until  Saturday,  September  14,  he  passed  away,  and  Theodore 
Roosevelt,  Vice-President,  was  sworn  in  as  President  of  the 
United  States.  On  taking  the  oath  of  office,  he  uttered  but 
one  sentence: 


"I  wish  to  say  that  it  shall  be  my  aim  to  continue  absolutely  unbroken 
the  policy  of  President  McKinley  for  the  peace,  prosperity,  and  the 
honor  of  our  beloved  country." 


CHAPTER  XX 

ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY 
1901  TO  1909 

OLONEL  ROOSEVELT  served  as  President  of  the 
United  States  from  September  13,  1901,  to  March  4, 
1909.  What  he  accomplished  during  those  years  is  still  too 
fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  to 
justify  its  recital  by  me  here;  suffice  it  to  say  that  he  gave 
one  of  the  best  Administrations  ever  known  in  the  history  of 
the  United  States.  He  accomplished  more  in  that  term 
than  any  of  his  predecessors;  more  laws  were  enacted,  laws 
of  more  general  benefit  to  the  people;  but  above  all,  his 
Administration  enforced  all  laws  on  the  statute  books  as  they 
had  never  been  enforced  before. 

The  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law  was  a  dead  letter  until  Mr. 
Roosevelt  instructed  the  Attorney- General  to  prosecute  its 
violators,  both  great  and  small.  No  fear  or  favor  was  shown 
in  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  against  the  rich  and  poor 
alike.  There  were  many  other  notable  features  of  his  ad 
ministration,  but  that,  to  my  mind,  stands  out  conspicuously 
before  all  the  others.  By  his  speeches,  by  his  public  mes 
sages,  he  awakened  the  slumbering  conscience  of  the  Nation, 
and  he  made  the  violators  of  the  law  in  high  places  come  to 
realize  that  they  would  receive  the  same  punishment  as  the 
lowest  offenders.  He  did  more  than  any  of  his  predecessors 
to  prevent  this  country  from  drifting  into  socialism. 

I  have  known  Colonel  Roosevelt  for  many  years.  I  knew 

292 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  293 

him  as  Civil  Service  Commissioner  under  President  Harri 
son.  In  that  position,  as  in  every  other  public  office  he  held, 
he  saw  to  it  that  the  law  was  strictly  enforced.  I  once  wrote 
him  a  note,  when  he  was  Civil  Service  Commissioner,  re 
questing  him  to  act  favorably  on  some  matter,  which  he  con 
sidered  was  contrary  to  his  duty.  He  promptly  returned 
this  characteristic  reply:  "You  have  no  right  to  ask  me  to 
do  this,  and  I  have  no  right  to  do  it." 

As  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Navy  under  President 
McKinley,  he  was  able,  aggressive,  and  pushing  in  prepar 
ing  the  Navy  for  the  Spanish- American  War.  He  seemed 
so  interested  in  what  he  was  doing  that  he  would  appear  to 
an  outsider  to  be  nervous  and  excitable.  My  old  friend,  the 
Hon.  W.  I.  Guffin,  than  whom  there  was  no  better  man,  was 
visiting  the  Department  with  me  one  day,  and  I  took  occasion 
to  introduce  him  to  Colonel  Roosevelt,  who  was  then  Assist 
ant  Secretary.  Guffin  was  astonished  at  Roosevelt's  man 
ners  and  his  way  of  speaking,  and  I  recall  Guffin's  remark 
when  we  left  the  office.  I  was  very  much  amused  at  it.  He 
said:  "Well,  that  is  Roosevelt,  is  it!  He  is  one  hell  of  a  Sec 
retary."  Doubtless  that  was  the  impression  that  Colonel 
Roosevelt  left  on  many  people  whom  he  met  in  the  Navy 
Department,  who  did  not  know  him  and  who  had  not  yet 
come  to  know  the  degree  of  promptness  and  ability  with 
which  he  despatched  public  business. 

I  was  at  the  Philadelphia  Convention  which  nominated 
Colonel  Roosevelt  for  Vice-President.  I  know  that  he  did 
not  desire  the  nomination,  but  it  was  thrust  on  him  through 
the  manipulation  of  Senator  T.  C.  Platt,  of  New  York,  then 
the  acknowledged  "easy  boss"  of  that  State.  Platt  himself 
said  afterwards  that  he  did  it  to  get  rid  of  him  as  Governor 
of  New  York,  and  that  he  regretted  it  every  day  of  his  life 
after  Roosevelt  became  President.  The  politicians  of  New 


294     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

York  did  not  want  Roosevelt  in  control  at  Albany,  and  they 
thought  it  would  be  an  admirable  plan  to  remove  him  from 
the  State,  and  eventually  relegate  him  to  private  life  —  to 
nominate  him  for  Vice-President.  But  the  fates  willed  dif 
ferently,  and  the  nomination  for  Vice-President  opened  the 
way  for  him  to  become  Mr.  McKinley's  successor,  in  which 
position  he  made  such  a  splendid  record  that  no  one  thought 
of  opposing  him  for  the  nomination  for  President  in  1904. 

As  President,  Colonel  Roosevelt  was  not  popular  with 
Senators  generally.  Personally,  I  got  along  with  him  very 
well.  In  all  the  years  that  he  was  President,  I  do  not  think 
he  ever  declined  to  grant  any  favor  that  I  asked  of  him,  with 
one  exception.  In  that  case,  while  he  declined  to  give  a 
very  distinguished  gentleman  in  Illinois  a  position,  for  which 
I  thought  him  admirably  qualified,  and  for  which  I  was  urg 
ing  him,  he  later  tendered  him  another  office,  which  my  friend 
declined  to  accept.  His  methods  of  transacting  business 
were  far  more  expeditious  than  those  of  any  of  his  predeces 
sors.  President  McKinley,  in  every  case,  insisted  on  Sena 
tors  placing  in  writing  their  recommendations  for  Federal 
offices ;  I  do  not  think  he  ever  made  an  appointment  without 
such  written  endorsements;  but  Colonel  Roosevelt  never 
bothered  much  about  written  endorsements.  He  would 
either  do  or  not  do  what  you  asked,  and  would  decide  the 
question  promptly. 

He  took  a  deep  interest  in  the  passage  of  the  necessary 
amendments  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act,  and  as  I  have 
said  elsewhere,  had  it  not  been  for  Colonel  Roosevelt,  the 
Hepburn  Bill  would  not  have  been  passed.  „  He  thought 
that  I  could  be  of  very  great  service  in  securing  the  passage 
of  the  amendments  which  both  he  and  I  deemed  necessary 
to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act,  by  remaining  chairman 
of  the  Senate's  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  and 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  295 

when  the  time  came  for  me  to  decide  whether  I  should  re 
main  chairman  of  that  committee,  or  accept  the  chairman 
ship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  he  took  occasion 
personally  to  urge  me  to  remain  at  the  head  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Committee.  But  at  the  time  the  personnel  of  the 
committee  was  such  that  I  had  despaired  of  securing  favor 
able  action  in  the  committee  on  an  amended  Interstate  Com 
merce  Act,  and  I  retired  to  accept  the  chairmanship  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 

Colonel  Roosevelt  has  proven  over  and  over  again,  in  every 
position  he  has  occupied,  from  Police  Commissioner  of  New 
York  to  the  Presidency  itself,  that  he  is  a  marvellous  man,  a 
man  of  great  resources,  great  intellect,  great  energy  and 
courage,  and  a  man  of  the  highest  degree  of  integrity.  He 
will  go  down  in  the  history  of  this  country  as  the  most  re 
markable  man  of  his  day. 

The  Hon.  John  Hay,  at  the  urgent  request  of  Colonel 
Roosevelt,  continued  to  act  as  Secretary  of  State  (to  which 
position  he  had  been  appointed  by  President  McKinley)  un 
til  his  death  in  1905.  John  Hay  was  the  most  accomplished 
diplomat,  in  my  judgment,  who  ever  occupied  the  high  posi 
tion  of  Secretary  of  State. 

I  knew  him  from  his  boyhood,  and  knew  his  father  and  all 
the  members  of  his  family.  The  Hon.  Milton  Hay,  whom 
I  have  mentioned  elsewhere,  and  who  was  my  law  partner, 
was  an  uncle  of  John  Hay.  John  was  a  student  in  our  law 
office  in  Springfield,  and  as  a  student  of  the  law  he  showed 
marked  intellectual  capacity  and  grasp.  It  was  from  our 
law  office  that  President  Lincoln  took  him  to  act  as  one  of  his 
private  secretaries  when  he  left  Springfield  for  Washington 
to  be  inaugurated  as  President  of  the  United  States,  and  Mr. 
Hay  continued  to  act  as  such  until  the  President's  death. 


296     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

He  abandoned  the  law  as  a  profession  and  became  finally  the 
editor  of  The  New  York  Tribune.  I  probably  knew  him 
more  intimately  than  any  one  else  in  public  life,  and  when 
Mr.  McKinley  became  President  I  urged  him  to  appoint 
Hay  as  Ambassador  to  Great  Britain.  He  served  in  that 
position  with  great  credit  to  himself  and  his  country.  He 
was  very  popular  with  the  members  of  the  British  Govern 
ment,  and  seemed  to  have  more  influence,  and  to  be  more  able 
to  accomplish  important  results,  than  any  of  his  predecessors 
in  that  office.  When  it  was  rumored  that  there  was  to  be  a 
vacancy  in  the  State  Department,  by  the  retirement  of  Mr. 
Day,  who  was  ambitious  to  go  on  the  Federal  Bench,  I  wrote 
Mr.  McKinley  a  letter,  in  which  I  told  him  that  he  could  find 
no  better  man  to  succeed  Mr.  Day  as  Secretary  than  his 
Ambassador  to  Great  Britain,  John  Hay.  And  he  was  ap 
pointed. 

As  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Hay  was  successful  in  carry 
ing  to  a  triumphant  conclusion  our  Far  Eastern  diplomacy. 
For  years  the  situation  in  the  Far  East,  and  especially  in 
China,  had  been  delicate  and  critical  to  an  extreme.  The 
acquisition  of  Hawaii  and  the  Philippines  gave  to  the  United 
States  an  extraordinary  interest  in  events  occurring  in  the 
Orient.  The  United  States  stood  for  the  "open  door"  in 
China;  and  as  the  result  of  the  diplomacy  and  influence  of 
Secretary  Hay,  freedom  of  commerce  was  secured,  and  the 
division  of  China  among  the  powers  has  been  prevented.  In 
our  relations  with  China,  we  have  pursued  a  disinterested 
policy  of  disavowal  of  territorial  aggrandizement,  and  a  dis 
position  to  respect  the  rights  of  that  Government,  confining 
our  interests  to  the  peaceful  development  of  trade.  Secre 
tary  Hay  never  hesitated  on  all  proper  occasions  to  assert 
our  influence  to  preserve  its  independence  and  prevent  its 
dismemberment. 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  297 

For  many  centuries  China  had  been  a  hermit  nation,  suc 
cessfully  resisting  foreign  influence  and  invasion;  but  grad 
ually,  on  one  pretext  or  another,  she  was  compelled  to  open 
her  ports,  and  Great  Britain,  Russia,  and  Germany  had 
gained  special  advantages  and  exceptional  privileges  in 
portions  of  China,  where,  under  the  guise  of  "spheres  of  in 
terest,"  they  were  exercising  considerable  control  over  an  im 
portant  part  of  that  Empire.  It  seemed  probable  that  not 
only  would  these  nations  absorb  the  trade  of  China,  but 
that  the  Empire  itself  would  be  dismembered  and  divided 
among  the  powers.  To  prevent  this,  Secretary  Hay  ad 
vanced  the  so-called  "open  door"  policy  and  successfully 
carried  it  out. 

In  September,  1899,  he  addressed  communications  to  the 
Governments  of  Great  Britain,  Russia,  Germany,  Italy,  and 
Japan,  suggesting  that,  as  he  understood  it  to  be  the  settled 
policy  and  purpose  of  those  countries  not  to  use  any  privileges 
which  might  be  granted  them  in  China  as  a  means  of  exclud 
ing  any  commercial  rival,  and  that  freedom  of  trade  for 
them  in  that  ancient  empire  meant  freedom  of  trade  for  all 
the  world  alike,  he  considered  that  the  maintenance  of  this 
policy  was  alike  urgently  demanded  by  the  commercial  com 
munities  of  these  several  nations,  and  that  it  was  the  only  one 
which  would  improve  existing  conditions  and  extend  their 
future  operation.  He  further  suggested  that  it  was  the  de 
sire  of  the  United  States  Government  that  the  interests  of  its 
citizens  should  not  be  prejudiced  through  exclusive  treat 
ment  by  any  of  the  controlling  powers  within  their  respective 
spheres  of  interest  in  China,  and  that  it  hoped  to  retain  there 
an  open  market  for  all  the  world's  commerce,  remove  dan 
gerous  sources  of  international  irritation,  and  promote  ad 
ministrative  reform.  Secretary  Hay  accordingly  invited  a 
declaration  by  each  of  them  in  regard  to  the  treatment  of 


298     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

foreign  commerce  in  their  spheres  of  interest.  Without 
inconsiderable  delay  the  Governments  of  Great  Britain, 
Russia,  Germany,  Italy,  and  Japan  replied  to  his  circular 
note,  giving  cordial  and  full  assurance  of  endorsement  of 
the  principles  suggested  by  our  Government.  Thus  was 
successfully  begun  the  since  famous  "open  door"  policy  in 
China. 

But  this  great  triumph  in  the  interest  of  the  freedom  of 
the  world's  commerce  was  followed  by  the  Boxer  out 
break  of  1900.  The  German  Minister  was  murdered  in  the 
streets  of  Peking,  the  legations  were  attacked  and  in  a  state 
of  siege  for  a  month. 

The  Boxer  outbreak  was  made  the  occasion  of  a  joint  in 
ternational  expedition  for  the  relief  of  the  diplomatic  repre 
sentatives  and  other  foreigners  whose  lives  were  in  peril. 
Congress  was  not  in  session,  but  on  Secretary  Hay's  advice 
there  was  despatched  a  division  of  the  American  Army  com 
posed  of  all  arms  of  the  service.  This  almost  amounted  to  a 
declaration  of  war,  or  the  waging  of  war  without  the  con 
sent  of  Congress.  The  Executive  was  justified,  however, 
and  did  not  hestitate  to  assume  the  responsibility. 

In  the  midst  of  the  intense  excitement  throughout  the 
world,  when  the  downfall  of  the  Empire  of  China  seemed  al 
most  certain,  Secretary  Hay,  with  the  foresight  which  always 
distinguished  his  official  acts,  issued  a  circular  note  on  July 
3,  1900,  to  all  the  powers  having  interests  in  China,  stating 
the  position  of  the  United  States ;  that  it  would  be  our  policy 
to  find  a  solution  which  would  bring  permanent  safety  and 
peace  to  China,  preserve  its  territorial  and  administrative 
entity,  protect  all  rights  guaranteed  by  treaty  and  interna 
tional  law,  and  safeguard  for  the  world  the  principle  of  equal 
and  impartial  trade  with  all  parts  of  the  Chinese  Empire. 
Secretary  Hay's  note  gave  notice  to  the  world  that  the  United 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  299 

States  would  not  permit  the  dismemberment  of  China,  and  it 
was  so  in  accord  writh  the  principles  of  justice  that  it  met  with 
the  approval  of  all. 

After  the  relief  of  the  legations  and  the  suppression  of  the 
Boxer  troubles  by  the  allied  powers,  there  followed  a  long 
period  of  negotiation,  and  an  enormous  and  exorbitant  de 
mand  was  made  by  the  allies  as  an  indemnity.  So  exorbitant 
was  it  at  first  that  China  probably  never  would  have  been 
able  to  pay.  Secretary  Hay  constantly  intervened  to  reduce 
the  demands  of  the  powers  and  cut  down  to  a  reasonable 
limit  the  enormous  indemnity  they  were  seeking  to  exact. 
Finally  the  protocol  of  1901  was  signed,  imposing  very  heavy 
and  humiliating  burdens  on  China.  It  has  been  the  province 
of  the  United  States  to  alleviate  these  burdens,  and  we  have 
only  recently  remitted  a  very  large  portion  of  the  indemnity 
which  was  to  have  come  to  the  United  States. 

Later,  Secretary  Hay  negotiated  a  very  favorable  com 
mercial  treaty  with  China  which  further  strengthened  the 
"open  door,"  gave  increased  privileges  to  our  diplomatic  and 
consular  officers,  and  to  our  citizens  in  China,  and  opened 
new  cities  to  international  trade  and  residence. 

One  of  Secretary  Hay's  last  acts  in  the  State  Department 
was  another  diplomatic  triumph  in  the  interest  of  China.  It 
had  been  apparent  for  some  time  that  war  between  Russia 
and  Japan  was  inevitable,  and  Mr.  Hay  realized  that  war 
might  seriously  impair  the  integrity  of  China  and  the  benefits 
of  the  "open  door"  policy.  Immediately  after  the  war  com 
menced,  therefore,  on  February  10,  1904,  Mr.  Hay  ad 
dressed  to  the  Governments  of  Russia,  Japan,  and  China, 
and  to  all  other  powers  having  spheres  of  influence  in  China, 
a  circular  note  in  which  he  said: 

"It  is  the  earnest  desire  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  that 
in  the  military  operations  which  have  begun  between  Russia  and  Japan, 


300     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  neutrality  of  China,  and  in  all  practicable  ways  her  administrative 
entity,  shall  be  protected  by  both  parties,  and  that  the  area  of  hos 
tilities  shall  be  localized  and  limited  as  much  as  possible,  so  that  undue 
excitement  and  disturbance  of  the  Chinese  people  may  be  prevented, 
and  the  least  possible  loss  to  the  commerce  and  peaceful  intercourse  of 
the  world  may  be  occasioned." 

Mr.  Hay's  proposition  was  commended  by 'the  world  and 
was  accepted  by  the  neutral  nations,  and  also  by  China, 
Russia,  and  Japan. 

Secretary  Hay's  measures  respecting  China  were  of  the 
greatest  importance  and  significance,  because  they  not  only 
tended  to  the  peace  of  the  world,  but  they  have  preserved  the 
extensive  territory  and  enormous  population  of  that  empire 
to  the  free  and  untrammelled  trade  and  commerce  of  all 
countries. 

In  addition  to  securing  from  Great  Britain,  through  the 
Hay-Pauncefote  treaty,  the  abrogation  of  the  Clayton-Bul- 
wer  treaty,  thereby  making  it  possible  for  the  United  States 
to  construct  the  Isthmian  Canal,  Secretary  Hay  succeeded  in 
settling  the  controversy  over  the  Alaskan  boundary,  which 
had  been  a  subject  of  dispute  between  the  United  States  and 
Great  Britain  for  half  a  century.  The  treaty  of  1868,  be 
tween  the  United  States  and  Russia,  by  which  we  acquired 
Alaska,  in  describing  the  boundary  of  Alaska,  adopted  the 
description  contained  in  the  treaty  of  1825,  between  Great 
Britain  and  Russia.  Years  ago  it  was  discovered  that  the 
boundary  described  in  the  treaty  of  1825  was  incorrect  as  a 
geographical  fact. 

While  the  country  remained  unsettled  the  definite  bound 
ary  was  not  so  material,  but  since  the  first  Cleveland  Ad 
ministration  the  Alaskan  boundary  had  been  an  important 
subject  of  dispute.  The  feeling  among  our  people  in  Alaska 
and  among  the  Canadians  became  very  bitter.  This  was  one 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  301 

of  the  principal  reasons  for  the  creation  of  the  Joint  High 
Commission  in  1899,  whose  purpose  it  was  to  settle  all  out 
standing  questions  between  the  United  States  and  Canada, 
the  principal  one  being  the  Alaskan  boundary.  The  Joint 
High  Commission  made  considerable  progress  in  adjusting 
these  questions,  but  failing  to  reach  an  agreement  as  to  the 
Alaskan  boundary,  the  commission  adjourned  without  dis 
posing  of  any  of  the  subjects  in  controversy.  President 
Roosevelt  and  Secretary  Hay,  in  view  of  our  long  and  undis 
puted  occupation  of  the  territory  in  question,  declined  to  al 
low  the  reference  of  the  Alaskan  boundary  to  a  regular  arbi 
tration  at  the  Hague,  but  instead,  Secretary  Hay  proposed 
the  creation  of  a  judicial  tribunal  composed  of  an  equal 
number  of  members  from  each  country,  feeling  confident 
that  our  claim  would  be  successfully  established  by  such  a 
body.  There  was  very  great  opposition,  and  there  were 
many  predictions  of  failure,  but  on  January  24,  1903,  a 
treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  was 
signed,  providing  for  such  a  tribunal. 

The  treaty  was  duly  ratified,  and  the  tribunal  appointed, 
and  on  October  20,  1903,  reached  a  conclusion  which  was  a 
complete  victory  for  the  United  States,  sustaining  as  it  did 
every  material  contention  of  our  Government. 

The  settlement  of  the  Alaskan  boundary  was  a  very  not 
able  diplomatic  triumph,  and  Secretary  Hay  is  entitled  to 
much  credit  for  it. 

I  cannot  go  into  the  many  important  matters  which  Mr. 
Hay  disposed  of  as  Secretary  of  State.  He  left  a  splendid 
record.  I  made  it  a  point  to  keep  in  constant  touch  with 
him  by  visiting  at  his  office  frequently,  and  he  always  talked 
with  me  frankly  and  freely  concerning  the  important  negotia 
tions  in  which  he  was  engaged.  The  only  criticism  I  have  to 
make  of  him  as  Secretary  of  State  is,  that  he  was  disposed, 


302     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

wherever  he  could  possibly  do  so,  to  make  international  agree 
ments  and  settle  differences  without  consulting  the  Senate. 
And,  in  addition,  I  never  could  induce  him  to  come  before 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  and  explain  to  the  com 
mittee  personally  various  treaties  and  important  matters  in 
which  the  State  Department  was  interested.  Why  he 
would  not  do  so  I  do  not  know.  He  was  an  exceedingly 
modest  man  and  shrank  from  all  controversy.  It  is  seldom 
however,  that  the  State  Department  has  had  at  its  head  sc 
brilliant  and  scholarly  a  man  as  John  Hay.  He  will  gc 
down  in  history  as  among  the  greatest  of  our  Secretaries  ol 
State. 

I  will  make  some  further  references  to  the  important  re 
sults  of  the  Roosevelt  Administration  in  what  I  shall  say  in  i 
later  chapter  concerning  the  work  of  the  Committee  or 
Foreign  Relations. 

William  Howard  Taft,  now  President  of  the  Unitec 
States,  was  President  Roosevelt's  Secretary  of  War,  and  * 
very  able  Secretary  he  was.  I  first  knew  him  in  Washing 
ton,  when,  as  a  young  man  but  thirty-three  years  of  age,  he 
was  serving  as  Solicitor  General  under  President  Harrison 
I  followed  his  career  very  closely  from  the  time  I  first  became 
acquainted  with  him. 

As  a  United  States  Circuit  Judge,  to  which  position  he 
was  appointed  by  President  Harrison,  he  was  regarded  a* 
one  of  the  ablest  in  the  country.  The  Circuit  Court  oJ 
Appeals  on  which  he  served  was  a  notable  one.  It  was 
composed  of  three  men  who  have  since  occupied  the  highest 
positions  in  the  United  States.  William  R.  Day  was  first 
Assistant  Secretary  of  State,  then  Secretary  of  State,  one  oi 
the  negotiators  of  the  Paris  Peace  Treaty,  Circuit  Judge, 
and  later  a  Supreme  Court  Justice.  Judge  Taft  was  first 


ROOSEVELT'S  PRESIDENCY  303 

civil  Governor  of  the  Philippines,  Secretary  of  War,  and 
then  President;  and  he  has  only  recently  appointed  his  old 
colleague,  Judge  Lurton,  the  third  member  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals,  to  the  position  of  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States. 

Judge  Taft  has  occupied  many  high  positions,  all  of  which 
he  has  filled  with  great  honor  and  distinction.  I  doubt 
whether  he  has  enjoyed  the  high  office  of  President  of  the 
United  States.  I  myself  have  always  thought  that  he  would 
have  made  one  of  our  greatest  Chief  Justices  had  he  been  ap 
pointed  to  that  position. 

Just  before  the  National  Convention  of  1908  assembled 
at  Chicago,  in  which  convention  I  was  chairman  of  the  Illi 
nois  delegation,  when  every  one  knew  that  Taft  was  sure  to 
be  the  nominee,  I  called  on  him  at  the  War  Department,  and 
in  the  course  of  the  conversation  I  took  occasion  to  remark 
that  I  had  always  been  in  favor  of  him  for  Chief  Justice, 
but  it  seemed  now  that  he  was  certain  to  be  the  nominee  for 
President,  and  his  career  would  consequently  go  along  an 
other  line.  He  replied:  "If  your  friend  Chief  Justice 
Fuller  should  retire  and  the  President  should  send  me  a 
commission  as  Chief  Justice,  I  would  take  it  now." 

It  is  my  purpose  to  practically  close  these  memoirs  with 
the  end  of  the  Roosevelt  Administration,  for  the  reason  that 
I  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  write  in  detail  of  events  occurring 
within  the  past  two  years.  All  that  I  will  venture  to  say  is 
that  my  relations  with  Mr.  Taft  as  President  have  been  of  the 
most  cordial  and  friendly  character ;  and  no  one  can  question 
that  he  has  been  thoroughly  conscientious  in  the  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  President  of  the  United  States.  That  in 
1910  the  party  went  down  in  defeat  for  the  first  time  in 
eighteen  years  cannot  be  charged  to  President  Taft.  Noth 
ing  that  he  did  as  Chief  Executive  was  responsible  for  that 


304     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

defeat.  I  myself  believe  that  it  was  simply  the  result  of  the 
people  becoming  tired  of  too  much  prosperity  under  Repub 
lican  administration.  The  newspaper  agitation  over  the 
Aldrich-Payne  Tariff  Bill  was  mainly  instrumental  in  turn 
ing  the  House  of  Representatives  over  to  the  Democracy. 

The  Hon.  Philander  C.  Knox  was  Attorney-General  in 
President  Roosevelt's  cabinet,  as  he  had  been  in  the  cabinet 
of  his  predecessor.  He  is  now  serving  as  Secretary  of  State 
under  President  Taft.  He  has  had  a  long  and  highly  dis 
tinguished  career  at  the  bar,  and  is  probably  one  of  the  great 
est  lawyers  of  his  day.  He  served  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  for  some  years,  and  upon  entering  that  body 
he  at  once  took  his  place  as  a  leader  on  all  questions  of  a 
legal  and  constitutional  nature.  As  a  member  of  the  Judi 
ciary  Committee,  he  had  quite  a  commanding  influence  on 
important  legislation  coming  from  that  committee.  As  Sec 
retary  of  State  Mr.  Knox  has  been  successful  to  an  eminent 
degree,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  his  career  as  the  Premier 
of  the  Taft  Administration  will  add  to  his  great  fame  as  a 
lawyer  and  statesman. 

I  cannot  refrain  from  saying  a  word  in  reference  to  the 
Hon.  James  Wilson,  who  was  appointed  Secretary  of  Agri 
culture  by  President  McKinley,  in  which  position  he  has 
been  retained  by  both  President  Roosevelt  and  President 
Taft.  He  has  served  as  a  cabinet  officer  for  a  longer  con 
secutive  term  than  any  man  in  our  history. 

I  have  been  more  or  less  familiar  with  the  administra 
tion  of  the  Agricultural  Department  ever  since  its  crea 
tion,  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  Mr.  Wilson  has  been 
the  most  efficient  Secretary  of  Agriculture  that  we  have 
ever  had.  He  has  accomplished  greater  results  in  that  office 
than  any  of  his  predecessors,  and  should  remain  there  as 
long  as  he  will  consent  to  serve. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

INTERSTATE   COMMERCE 

AT  the  time  I  am  writing  these  lines,  no  question  of 
governmental  policy  occupies  so  prominent  a  place 
in  the  thoughts  of  the  people  as  that  of  controlling  the 
steady  growth  and  extending  influence  of  corporate  power, 
and  of  regulating  its  relations  to  the  public.  And  there 
are  no  corporations  whose  proceedings  so  directly  affect 
every  citizen  in  the  daily  pursuit  of  his  business  as  the  cor 
porations  engaged  in  transportation. 

Of  the  many  new  forces  introduced  into  every  depart 
ment  of  civilized  life  during  the  past  century,  none  have 
brought  about  more  marvellous  changes  than  the  railroad, 
as  an  instrumentality  of  commerce.  The  substitution  of 
steam  and  electricity  for  animal  power  was  one  of  the  most 
important  events  in  our  industrial  history.  The  commercial, 
social,  and  political  relations  of  the  nations,  have  been 
revolutionized  by  the  development  of  improved  means  of 
communication  and  transportation.  With  this  changed 
condition  of  affairs  in  the  commercial  world  came  new  ques 
tions  of  the  greatest  importance  for  the  consideration  of 
those  upon  whom  devolved  the  duty  of  making  the  nation's 
laws. 

In  the  early  days  of  railroads,  the  question  was  not  how 
to  regulate,  but  how  to  secure  them ;  but  in  the  early  seven 
ties  their  importance  grew  to  such  proportions  that  the  rail 
roads  threatened  to  become  the  masters  and  not  the  servants 
of  the  people.  There  were  all  sorts  of  abuses.  Railroad 
20  305 


306     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

officers  became  so  arrogant  that  they  seemed  to  assume  that 
they  were  above  all  law;  rebating  and  discriminations  were 
the  rule  and  not  the  exception.  It  was  the  public  indigna 
tion  against  long  continued  discrimination  and  undue  pref 
erences  which  brought  about  the  Granger  Movement,  which 
resulted,  seventeen  years  later,  in  the  enactment  of  the  first 
Interstate  Commerce  Act. 

With  the  Granger  Movement  of  the  early  seventies,  and 
the  passage  of  State  laws  for  the  control  of  railroad  trans 
portation,  began  the  discussion  which  is  still  before  Congress 
and  the  public  as  one  of  the  live  issues  of  the  day. 

It  so  happens  that  I  have  been  intimately  connected  with 
this  subject  from  the  time  I  was  serving  as  Speaker  of  the 
Illinois  House  of  Representatives  in  1873. 

The  State  of  Illinois,  like  most  of  the  Western  States, 
had  a  law  on  the  subject  of  railroad  regulation;  but  it  was 
ineffective,  and  the  commission  under  it  had  no  practical 
power.  I  appointed  the  committee  of  the  House  of  Rep 
resentatives  of  the  Illinois  Legislature  in  1873,  of  which 
John  Oberly,  of  Cairo,  Illinois,  was  a  member,  and  it  was 
that  committee  that  reported  to  the  House  the  bill  which 
finally  became  a  law,  known  as  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse 
Law  of  1873.  It  is  still  the  existing  law  in  Illinois,  and 
was  for  many  years  regarded  as  one  of  the  broadest  and 
most  far-reaching  of  State  enactments. 

After  I  became  Governor  of  the  State,  in  1877,  I  ap 
pointed  a  new  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission  under 
the  new  law,  and  naturally  took  a  deep  interest  in  its  work. 
During  my  term  as  Governor  a  resolution  was  adopted  by 
the  General  Assembly  really  looking  to  the  abolition  of  the 
Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission,  but  on  its  face  in 
quiring  of  me  as  Governor  for  information  concerning  the 
cost  of  maintaining  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commis- 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  307 

sion,  and  the  benefits,  if  any,  of  the  commission,  to  the  peo 
ple  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 

To  this  resolution  I  promptly  responded  in  a  message 
to  the  General  Assembly,  dated  February  17,  1879,  which 
in  part  I  take  the  liberty  of  quoting  here,  because  never 
afterwards  in  Illinois,  so  far  as  I  know,  was  there  any  move 
ment  to  abolish  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission  and 
repeal  the  Illinois  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Act. 

After  giving  the  pay  and  expenses  of  the  board,  I  con 
tinued  : 

"To  answer  this  portion  of  the  resolution  in  a  manner  satisfactory  to 
myself  would  include  a  recital  of  the  many  attempts  that  have  been 
made  in  this  and  other  countries  to  control  railroad  corporations  by  legis 
lation.  In  a  paper  of  this  kind  such  a  reply  can  not  be  made.  I  must 
therefore  be  satisfied  with  a  glance  at  the  advance  that  resulted  in  the 
enactment  of  the  railroad  and  warehouse  laws  of  this  State. 

"Since  the  passage  of  the  laws  creating  the  railroad  and  warehouse 
commission,  in  1871,  Illinois  has  made  very  important  advances  toward 
the  solution  of  the  railroad  problem. 

"The  questions  involved  in  this  problem  have  not  only  been  before  the 
people  of  this  State,  but  in  other  States  and  countries. 

"In  England,  after  the  railroad  had  become  a  fact,  it  was  recognized 
as  a  public  highway.  The  right  of  Parliament  to  fix  rates  for  the  trans 
portation  of  passengers  and  freight  by  railroad  corporations  was  there 
fore  asserted,  and  schedules  of  rates  were  put  into  their  charters.  Those 
familiar  with  the  subject  need  not  be  told  that  the  attempt  to  establish 
rates  in  this  manner  was  a  failure.  Then  it  was  asserted  that  compe 
tition,  if  encouraged  by  the  Government,  would  prove  a  remedy  for 
the  abuses  with  which  the  railroads  were  charged.  The  suggestion  was 
acted  upon.  The  Government  encouraged  the  construction  of  compet 
ing  lines.  As  a  result,  rates  fell.  Competition,  however,  finally  began 
to  entail  disaster  upon  the  competitors  and  compel  them  to  become  allies 
to  escape  destruction.  The  competitors  combined;  railroads  were  con 
solidated;  rival  lines  were  united,  and  competition  was  thus  destroyed. 
The  danger  of  great  combinations  of  this  kind,  not  only  to  the  business 
interests  of  the  country,  but  also  to  the  State,  was  at  once  suggested,  and 


308     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

occasioned  alarm.  This  alarm  resulted  in  a  public  opinion  that  the 
Government  should  own  the  railroads.  But  consolidation,  to  the  sur 
prise  of  the  prophets  of  evil,  did  not  result  in  higher  rates.  On  the  con 
trary,  lower  rates  and  higher  dividends  resulted. 

"Thus  by  a  logical  process  of  attempt  and  failure  to  control  railroad 
corporations,  the  conclusion  was  reached  that  wise  policy  required  per 
mission  to  such  corporations  to  operate  their  railroads  in  their  own 
way  upon  ordinary  business  principles.  But  at  the  same  time  a  board 
of  commissioners  was  wisely  created  and  authorized  to  hear  and  deter 
mine  complaints  against  railroad  corporations,  and  to  exercise  other  im 
portant  powers.  This  board  was  created  about  five  years  ago;  and  the 
most  notable  feature  in  its  career,  says  Charles  Francis  Adams,  junior, 
'is  the  very  trifling  call  that  seems  to  have  been  made  upon  it.  The 
cases  which  come  before  it  are  neither  numerous  nor  of  great  importance. 
It  would,  however,  be  unwholly  safe  to  conclude  from  this  fact  that  such 
a  tribunal  is  unnecessary.  On  the  contrary,  it  may  be  confidently  as 
serted  that  no  competent  board  of  railroad  commissioners  clothed  with 
the  peculiar  power  of  the  English  board,  will,  either  there  or  anywhere 
else,  have  many  cases  to  dispose  of.  The  mere  fact  that  a  tribunal  is 
there,  that  a  machinery  does  exist  for  the  prompt  and  final  decision  of 
that  class  of  questions  put  an  end  to  them.  They  no  longer  arise. 

"The  process  through  which  the  public  mind  in  America  has  passed 
on  the  railroad  question  is  not  dissimilar  to  that  through  which  the  pub 
lic  mind  of  England  passed.  But  here  competition  was  relied  on  from 
the  first.  To  all  who  asked  for  them  railroad  charters  were  granted. 
The  result  has  been  the  construction  of  railroads  in  all  parts  of  the  coun 
try,  many  of  them  through  districts  of  country  without  business,  or  even 
population,  as  well  as  between  all  business  centres  and  through  populous, 
fertile,  and  well  cultivated  regions.  Free  trade  in  railroad  building,  and 
the  too  liberal  use  of  municipal  credit  in  their  aid,  has  induced  the  build 
ing  of  some  lines  which  are  wholly  unnecessary,  and  which  crowd,  dupli 
cate,  and  embarrass  lines  previously  built  and  which  were  fully  adequate 
to  the  needs  of  the  community. 

"In  Illinois,  railroad  enterprises  have  been  particularly  numerous  and 
have  made  the  State  renowned  for  having  the  most  miles  of  railroad 
track  —  for  being  the  chief  railroad  State. 

"But  competition  did  not  result  according  to  public  anticipation.  The 
competing  corporations  worked  without  sufficient  remuneration  at 
competing  points,  and,  to  make  good  the  losses  resulting,  were  often 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  309 

guilty  of  extortion  at  the  non-competing  points.  They  discriminated 
against  persons  and  places.  Citizens  protested  against  these  abuses  in 
vain.  The  railroad  corporations,  when  threatened  with  the  power  of  the 
Government,  indulged  in  the  language  of  defiance,  and  attempted  to 
control  legislation  to  their  own  advantage.  At  last  public  indignation 
became  excited  against  them.  They  did  not  heed  it.  They  believed 
the  courts  would  be  their  refuge  from  popular  fury.  The  indignation 
of  the  people  expressed  itself  in  many  ways  and  finally  found  utter 
ance  in  the  Constitution  of  1870.  In  this  Constitution  may  be  found 
all  the  phases  of  opinion  on  the  railroad  question  through  which  the 
English  mind  has  run.  The  railroad  is  declared  a  public  highway. 
The  establishment  of  reasonable  rates  of  charges  is  directed;  competi 
tion  between  railroads  is  recognized  as  necessary  to  the  public  welfare; 
and  the  General  Assembly  is  required  to  pass  laws  to  correct  abuses  and 
to  prevent  unjust  discrimination  and  extortion  in  the  rates  and  passenger 
tariffs  on  the  different  railroads  of  the  State,  and  enforce  such  laws  by 
adequate  penalties  to  the  extent,  if  necessary  for  that  purpose,  of  forfeit 
ure  of  their  property  and  franchises. 

"The  Constitution  did  more  than  this.  To  correct  abuses  of  the  inter 
ests  of  the  farmers  from  whose  fields  warehousemen  in  combination  with 
corporate  common  carriers  had  been  drawing  riches,  it  declared  all  ele 
vators  or  structures  where  grain  or  other  property  was  stored  for  a 
compensation,  public  warehouses,  and  expressly  directed  the  General  As 
sembly  to  pass  laws  for  the  government  of  warehouses,  for  the  inspection 
of  grain,  and  for  the  protection  of  producers,  shippers,  and  receivers  of 
grain  and  produce. 

"Promptly  after  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  the  Legislature  at 
tempted  to  give  these  provisions  vitality  by  the  enactment  of  laws  to 
carry  them  out.  One  of  these  created  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Com 
mission  and  imposed  on  it  important  duties.  Another  was  an  act  to  regu 
late  public  warehouses  and  warehousing.  By  this  act  other  important 
duties  were  imposed  upon  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission." 

After  reviewing  the  attempt  to  enforce  these  laws  the 
message  continues : 

"In  1873,  the  present  law  to  prevent  extortion  and  unjust  discrimina 
tion  in  rates  charged  for  the  transportation  of  passengers  and  freight 
on  railroads  in  this  State  was  passed.  It  was  prepared  and  enacted  with 


310     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  case  of  Illinois  vs.  C.  and  A. 
R.  R.,  fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  members  of  the  General  Assembly,  and 
every  suggestion  made  by  the  court  was  observed. 

"The  Commission  since  the  enactment  of  this  statute  has  brought  many 
suits  against  railroad  corporations  for  violation  of  the  law." 

After  reviewing  the  various  cases  I  proceeded: 

"In  1871,  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission  was  established. 
Its  creation  was  resisted  by  both  railroad  corporations  and  public  ware 
housemen,  and  after  its  organization  they  treated  it  with  little  consid 
eration.  They  refused  to  recognize  its  authority,  but  after  the  decision 
of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  declaring  the  doctrine  that 
the  Government  may  regulate  the  conduct  of  its  citizens  to  each  other, 
and,  when  necessary,  for  the  public  good,  the  manner  in  which  each 
shall  use  his  own  property,  the  railroad  corporations  and  public  ware 
housemen  began  to  grow  less  determined  in  their  opposition  to  the  at 
tempts  to  control  them,  until  at  this  time  there  is  very  little  opposition. 
They  now  give  prompt  attention  to  requests  of  the  Commission  for  the 
correction  of  abuses  called  to  its  notice  by  their  patrons;  and  thus  the 
Commissioners  not  only  settle  questions  arising  between  railroad  cor 
porations  and  those  who  patronize  them,  but  it  may  as  truthfully  be 
said  of  this  as  of  the  English  or  Massachusetts  Commmission,  that  the 
very  fact  of  its  existence  has  put  an  end  to  many  of  the  abuses  formerly 
practised  by  such  corporations,  and  which  were  angrily  complained  of  by 
the  people.  .  .  . 

"It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  conclusion  reached  by  the  English  states 
men  in  1874,  was  reached  in  Illinois  in  1873;  the  conclusion  that  rail 
road  companies  ought  to  have  the  right  to  control  their  own  affairs, 
fix  their  own  rates  of  transportation,  be  free  from  meddlesome  legisla 
tion,  and,  as  has  been  said,  work  out  their  own  destiny  in  their  own  way, 
just  so  long  as  they  show  a  reasonable  regard  for  the  requirements  of 
the  community." 

After  analyzing  the  law  of  1873,  referring  to  the  pro 
cedure  under  it,  to  the  decision  of  the  courts,  and  the  fact 
that  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commissioners  made  un 
der  it  a  schedule  of  maximum  rates  of  charges,  I  said : 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  311 

"The  schedule  will  require  revision  from  time  to  time,  and  this  work 
can  be  done  only  by  men  who  can  give  it  their  whole  time,  and  who  will 
become  students  of  the  great  subject  of  transportation. 

"Before  action  by  the  Supreme  Court  it  has  not  been  deei  ed  advisable 
that  the  Commissioners  should  revise  the  schedule,  and  pu.  the  State 
thereby  to  what  might  be  unnecessary  expense;  nor  that  they  should 
multiply  suits  under  the  law  of  1873,  against  railroad  companies  for  sim 
ilar  offences  to  those  set  up  in  the  cases  now  pending. 

"Ever  since  its  organization  the  board  has  been  putting  into  operation 
new  laws  founded  upon  old  principles  applied  to  new  facts  and  it  has 
been  compelled  to  walk  with  slow  step.  It  has  been  required,  in  the 
assertion  of  its  authority  to  go  from  one  court  to  another,  and  await  the 
approval  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  legislation  directed  by  the  Con 
stitution  of  1870. 

"It  has  won  a  victory  in  the  warehouse  controversy  and  secured  the 
judicial  endorsement  of  doctrines  which  in  this  age  of  concentration 
and  monopoly,  are  absolutely  necessary  to  the  public  welfare.  .  .  * 

"Leaving  out  of  view  the  benefits  that  have  resulted  to  the  people  by 
the  mere  fact  of  the  existence  of  the  Board,  which  has  prevented  many 
abuses  that  would  have  been  committed  save  for  its  presence  in  the 
State,  it  has  been  at  work,  and  useful.  It  has  perfected  the  organiza 
tion  of  the  Grain  Inspection  Department  at  Chicago;  it  has  gathered 
statistics  in  reference  to  transportation  that  are  of  very  great  benefit  to 
the  public;  it  has  adopted  the  policy  of  railroad  examinations  with  a 
view  to  security  of  life;  and,  in  my  judgment,  the  authority  of  the  Com 
mission  ought  to  be  enlarged  so  as  to  enable  it  to  compel  the  railroad 
companies  to  improve  their  tracks  and  bridges,  when,  in  the  judgment 
of  the  Commission,  such  portions  of  railroads  become  unsafe.  The  Rail 
road  Commissioners  act  as  arbitrators  between  the  railroad  companies 
and  their  patrons;  and  in  the  Commissioners'  report  they  say  they 
have  succeeded  in  settling  most  of  the  complaints  made  to  them  in  a 
manner  satisfactory  to  all  the  parties  to  the  controversies. 

"In  my  judgment  if  the  Commission  were  dispensed  with  by  the  Legis 
lature,  difficulties  would  soon  arise,  agitation  would  commence  again,  and 
controversies  would  run  riot.  New  legislation  would  follow,  another 
board  of  some  kind  would  soon  be  created,  and  the  track  we  have  just 
passed  over  would  be  again  travelled  by  the  people's  representatives. 

"The  Board  should  be  sustained  in  the  interest  of  all  the  people.  In 
stead  of  being  destroyed  it  should  be  strengthened.  It  should  not  only 


312     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

have  the  authority  with  which  it  is  now  vested,  but  more.  It  should  be 
made  a  legal  arbitrator  in  all  matters  of  controversy  between  railroad 
companies  and  warehouses  and  their  patrons;  and  it  should  be  required 
to  make  ex-  Jnation  of  roads,  and  be  invested  with  authority  to  com 
pel  reparation  of  unsafe  and  defective  bridges,  culverts,  track,  and 
rolling-stock. 

"(Signed)  S.  M.  CULLOM, 

"Governor." 

My  experience,  as  Chief  Executive  of  the  State,  with  the 
practical  workings  of  the  Railroad  and  Warehouse  Law, 
clearly  demonstrated  to  me  that  a  State  statute,  no  matter 
how  drastic  it  might  be,  was  utterly  inadequate  to  meet  the 
evils  complained  of,  and  that  effective  regulation  must  be 
Federal  and  not  State,  or  probably  Federal  and  State  com 
bined.  Some  of  the  States  had  attempted  to  exercise  con 
trol  over  interstate  traffic  which  originated  in  the  State, 
but  it  seemed  perfectly  clear  from  a  long  line  of  decisions 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  beginning  with  Gibbons  vs.  Ogden, 
and  continuing  with  Reading  Railway  vs.  Pennsylvania; 
Baltimore  and  Ohio  vs.  Maryland,  and  many  other  cases, 
that  the  States  as  such  had  no  control  over  interstate  com 
merce.  But  it  was  not  until  our  own  Illinois  case  ( W abash 
Railroad  vs.  Illinois] ,  that  the  Supreme  Court  settled  it 
once  and  for  all.  It  was  clearly  stated  in  that  case  that 
the  power  of  Congress  was  exclusive,  and  the  Court  said 
that,  "notwithstanding  whatever  dicta  might  appear  in  other 
cases,  this  court  holds  now  and  has  never  consciously  held 
otherwise,  that  a  statute  of  a  State  intended  to  regulate 
or  to  tax  or  to  impose  any  other  restriction  upon  the  trans 
mission  of  persons  or  property  from  one  State  to  another 
is  not  within  the  class  of  legislation  which  the  States  may 
enact  in  the  absence  of  legislation  by  Congress,  and  that 
such  statutes  are  void." 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  313 

This  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  was  rendered  just 
about  the  time  I  was  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate, 
and  I  then  and  there  determined  that  I  would  make  it  one 
of  my  great  aims  in  the  Senate  to  secure  the  enactment  of 
a  Federal  statute  regulating  interstate  commerce. 

It  would  seem  astonishing  that  the  Commerce  clause  of 
the  Constitution  should  have  remained  dormant,  as  it  did 
for  nearly  a  century.  Aside  from  two  unimportant  acts, 
no  statute  had  been  passed  under  it  from  the  beginning  of 
the  Government  until  the  Act  to  Regulate  Commerce  was 
passed  in  1887. 

Not  even  a  serious  attempt  had  been  made  to  pass  an 
act  for  the  regulation  of  interstate  commerce.  Bills  were 
introduced  from  Congress  to  Congress  and  laid  aside;  some 
investigations  were  made  —  as,  for  instance,  the  Windom 
investigation  by  a  select  committee  of  the  House  in  1873 
—  but  it  all  came  to  naught.  It  seemed  that  no  one  man, 
either  in  the  Senate  or  House,  had  made  it  his  business  to 
secure  the  passage  of  such  an  act. 

Very  fortunately,  as  I  see  it  now,  when  I  first  came  to 
the  Senate,  I  received  no  important  committee  assignments. 
Having  been  in  public  life  for  many  years,  member  of  Con 
gress,  Governor  of  my  State,  I  naturally  felt  that  I  would 
be  properly  taken  care  of  without  appealing  to  my  older 
colleagues  for  assistance.  Even  my  own  colleague,  General 
Logan,  did  not  interest  himself  in  the  matter.  I  attended 
the  caucus  when  the  committee  announcements  were  made, 
and  observing  that  I  received  nothing  of  any  consequence, 
I  addressed  the  caucus  and  protested  that  I  had  not  been 
treated  properly.  Later  Senator  Edmunds  resigned  his 
place  as  a  regent  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution  and  I  was 
appointed  to  succeed  him  in  that  position. 

I  was  assigned,  however,  to  the  Committee  on  Railroads 


FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

—  which  was  then  what  we  know  now  in  the  Senate  as  a 
non-working  committee.  I  determined  that  the  committee 
should  have  something  to  do,  and  I  immediately  became 
active  in  securing  the  consideration  of  an  act  for  the  regula 
tion  of  interstate  commerce.  I  drew  up  a  bill,  introduced 
it,  had  it  referred  to  the  committee,  and  finally  secured  its 
consideration  and  report  to  the  Senate.  No  one  paid  any 
particular  attention  to  what  I  was  doing  until  then.  When 
the  bill  was  reported  to  the  Senate,  and  I  was  pushing  and 
urging  and  doing  everything  in  my  power  to  secure  its  con 
sideration,  Senator  Allison,  always  my  friend,  always  want 
ing  to  assist  me  in  any  way  in  his  power,  came  to  me  one  day 
and  said: 

"Cullom,  we  know  nothing  about  this  question;  we  are 
groping  in  the  dark;  and  I  believe  that  there  ought  to  be 
a  select  committee  of  the  Senate  appointed  to  investigate 
the  question,  to  go  out  among  the  people,  take  testimony, 
and  find  out  what  they  know  about  it, —  what  the  experts 
know,  what  the  railroad  officials  know,  what  public  opinion 
generally  is,  and  report  their  conclusions  to  the  Senate 
at  the  beginning  of  the  next  session.  I  am  willing  to  help 
you  secure  the  passage  of  a  resolution  with  that  end  in  view." 

This  was  perfectly  agreeable  to  me  and,  on  March  17, 
1885,  a  resolution  of  the  Senate,  introduced  by  me,  was 
adopted.  This  resolution  provided  — 

"That  a  select  committee  of  five  Senators  be  appointed  to  investigate 
and  report  upon  the  subject  of  the  regulation  of  the  transportation  by 
railroad  and  water  routes  in  connection  or  in  competition  with  said  rail 
roads  of  freights  and  passengers  between  the  several  States,  with  au 
thority  to  sit  during  the  recess  of  Congress,  and  with  power  to  summon 
witnesses,  and  to  do  whatever  is  necessary  for  a  full  examination  of 
the  subject,  and  report  to  the  Senate  on  or  before  the  second  Monday 
in  December  next.  Said  committee  shall  have  power  to  appoint  a  clerk 
and  stenographer,  and  the  expenses  of  such  investigation  shall  be  paid 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  315 

from  the  appropriation  for  expenses  of  inquiries  and  investigations  or 
dered  by  the  Senate." 

The  committee,  of  which  I  was  made  chairman,  was  ap 
pointed  in  due  course,  my  colleagues  being  Senator  O.  H. 
Platt,  of  Connecticut;  Senator  Warner  Miller,  of  New 
York;  Senator  Arthur  Pugh  Gorman,  of  Maryland;  and 
Senator  Isham  G.  Harris,  of  Tennessee.  Leaving  out  any 
reference  to  myself,  the  selection  was  regarded  as  having 
been  most  judicious  and  suitable. 

And  here  let  me  digress  to  say  a  few  words  in  reference 
to  my  colleagues  on  that  committee. 

Senator  Warner  Miller  was  a  strong  man  intellectually, 
and  a  good  business  man.  He  had  succeeded  Senator  T. 
C.  Platt  on  March  4,  1881,  and  readily  took  his  place  in 
the  Senate  as  one  of  its  influential  members,  although  he 
served  but  one  term.  He  was  a  valuable  man  as  a  member 
of  the  committee,  and  took  a  very  prominent  part  in  the  de 
bates  preceding  the  passage  of  the  act. 

Senator  Gorman  had  a  remarkable  public  career.  With 
out  the  advantages  of  influential  family,  without  wealth, 
with  only  limited  education,  through  his  own  exertions  alone 
he  arose  from  the  position  of  a  page  in  the  United  States 
Senate  to  the  position  of  Senator  and  leader  of  his  party 
in  the  Senate.  He  was  a  protege,  friend,  and  follower  of 
that  illustrious  son  of  Illinois,  Stephen  A.  Douglas.  He 
was  one  of  the  most  sagacious  politicians  of  his  day.  By 
his  shrewd  management  of  the  Cleveland  campaign  he  se 
cured  the  defeat  of  Mr.  Elaine  and  the  election  of  Mr.  Cleve 
land.  His  charming  personality,  his  suavity  of  manner,  his 
magnetic  influence  over  men  with  whom  he  came  into  con 
tact,  combined  with  his  marked  ability,  made  it  easy  for  him 
to  retain  the  difficult  position  of  a  leader  of  his  great  party. 
He  enjoyed  in  the  highest  degree  the  respect  and  confidence 


316     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

of  every  Senator  with  whom  he  served,  on  both  sides  of  the 
chamber,  and  specially  was  his  influence  felt  in  securing 
the  support  of  the  Democratic  Senators  in  the  passage  of  the 
Act  of  1887. 

Senator  Harris,  of  Tennessee,  was  a  very  useful  member 
of  the  Senate,  and  was  a  man  possessed  of  more  than  or 
dinary  ability.  His  ability,  perhaps,  was  not  as  great  as 
Senator  Gorman's,  although  he  was  a  very  influential  and 
highly  respected  member  of  the  Senate.  He  was  a  hard 
worker;  and  one  trait  in  particular  that  I  remember  about 
him  was,  he  never  failed  to  attend  promptly  on  time  the 
meeting  of  any  committee  of  which  he  was  a  member.  In 
deed,  I  do  not  know  of  any  man  with  whom  I  have  served 
in  the  Senate,  aside  from  my  respected  colleague,  Senator 
Frye,  who  was  so  punctual. 

He  was  a  man  of  convivial  habits,  and  used  to  poke  con 
siderable  fun  at  me  because  I  would  not  drink  or  play  poker. 
At  the  time  when  the  select  committee  was  to  meet  in  Mem 
phis,  the  home  of  Senator  Harris,  the  prominent  business  men 
of  that  place  waited  on  him  and  told  him  they  understood 
a  very  eminent  committee  was  coming  there  in  a  few  days, 
and  they  would  like  to  show  them  some  courtesies.  Harris 
replied  that  he  did  not  know  who  would  be  there;  that 
Senator  Platt  would  not,  and  he  did  not  believe  Senator 
Gorman  would  —  in  fact,  he  did  not  believe  any  one  would 
be  there,  excepting  the  chairman  and  himself;  and  so  far 
as  the  chairman,  Senator  Cullom,  was  concerned,  they  could 
not  do  anything  for  him,  as  he  did  not  drink  or  smoke,  and 
was  "one  of  the  damnedest,  poorest  card-players  he  had  ever 
known."  So,  about  all  the  entertaining  they  could  do  for 
him  would  be  to  show  him  about  the  city. 

Many  amusing  stories  were  told  of  him.  When  I  called 
the  committee  together,  preliminary  to  starting  out  on  our 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  317 

tour,  I  told  them  that  I  would  be  very  glad  to  allow  them 
everything  within  reason  that  was  necessary,  but  the  Gov 
ernment  would  not  pay  for  their  whiskey  and  cigars.  Harris 
promptly  replied:  "That's  right,  Mr.  Chairman.  So  far 
as  I  'm  concerned,  if  I  can't  get  my  whiskey  by  standing 
around  the  bar  when  other  people  are  drinking,  I  will  pay 
for  it  myself." 

When  the  committee  were  in  Minneapolis,  we  were  sit 
ting  at  a  long  table  at  dinner;  I  was  at  one  end,  and  Harris 
was  at  the  other,  facing  me.  An  old  soldier  came  up  to 
speak  to  me,  and  glancing  down  toward  the  other  end  of 
the  table,  he  asked:  "Is  n't  that  old  Harris  of  Tennessee?  " 
When  I  replied  that  it  was,  he  continued:  "Well,  well! 
The  last  time  I  saw  him,  he  was  wearing  a  linen-duster, 
riding  a  mule,  and  going  South  like  hell." 

Harris  was  a  man  of  the  most  rigid  honesty.  He  not 
only  rendered  valuable  assistance  in  conducting  the  in 
vestigation,  especially  through  the  South,  which  sec 
tion  of  the  country  he  particularly  represented,  but  took 
a  prominent  part  in  the  debates  and  generally  performed 
his  full  share  toward  securing  the  passage  of  the  act. 

Of  Senator  O.  H.  Platt  I  have  already  written. 

But  to  return.  Immediately  after  the  adjournment  of 
Congress  this  select  committee  visited  Boston,  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  Buffalo,  Detroit,  Chicago,  St.  Louis,  Des 
Moines,  Omaha,  Minneapolis,  and  St.  Paul,  where  we  ad 
journed  to  meet  in  the  South.  We  went  to  Memphis  first, 
then  to  New  Orleans  and  Atlanta,  whence  we  returned  to 
Washington,  where  I  prepared  the  report  of  the  committee 
which  was  submitted  to  the  Senate,  January  18,  1886. 

The  committee  began  its  work  impressed  with  the  im 
portance  of  the  duty  with  which  it  had  been  charged,  and 
with  each  step  taken  in  prosecuting  the  inquiry  we  realized 


318     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

more  fully  how  heavy  were  the  obstacles  to  be  overcome, 
how  serious  were  the  abuses  that  existed,  how  the  public 
sentiment  over  the  entire  country  was  aroused,  and  how  diffi 
cult  it  was  going  to  be  to  frame  and  secure  the  passage  of 
a  measure  adequate  to  relieve  the  situation.  After  many 
sessions  and  long  conferences  the  select  committee  finally 
agreed  upon  a  bill  which,  in  its  opinion,  would  correct  the 
evils  complained  of. 

Even  after  the  committee  had  agreed  to  the  bill,  I  was 
not  entirely  satisfied ;  I  feared  the  existence  of  some  absurdi 
ties,  some  features,  which  the  railroads  could  not  possibly 
comply  with;  and  so  I  asked  Senator  Platt  to  meet  me  in 
New  York,  previously  having  arranged  with  Mr.  Fink  and 
Mr.  Blanchard,  two  of  the  great  railroad  men  of  their  day, 
and  a  gentleman  representing  specially  the  people's  interests, 
whose  name  I  do  not  recall,  but  who  had  been  interested  in 
securing  regulation  in  New  York  and  was  an  expert  on 
the  proposition,  to  meet  with  us  in  that  city.  We  all  met 
as  planned.  I  stated  that  I  desired  to  take  the  bill  up 
with  them,  section  by  section,  paragraph  by  paragraph,  and 
if  anything  absurd  or  impracticable  was  found,  or  anything 
that  could  not  be  carried  out,  attention  should  be  called 
to  it,  and  we  would  discuss  it  and  amend  it  if  necessary. 
We  went  ahead  on  this  line  and  were  arguing  over  some 
proposition,  when  Mr.  Fink  got  up  and  remarked:  "Let 
it  go;  the  whole  thing  is  absurd  anyhow."  I  arose  and  said 
that  if  that  was  the  attitude  of  the  railroad  men,  when  the 
committee's  only  object  was  to  report  to  the  Senate  a  fair 
bill,  that  the  conference  might  as  well  end.  The  other  mem 
bers  of  the  conference  intervened  and  said  it  was  not  fair 
that  the  chairman  of  the  committee  should  be  treated  in  that 
way,  that  Senator  Cullom  was  acting  in  absolute  good  faith ; 
whereupon  Mr.  Fink  apologized,  and  the  reading  was  re- 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  819 

sumed,  and  some  amendments  made  where  found  neces 
sary. 

And  this  incident  recalls  to  mind  another  aspect  of  the 
investigation.  While  the  select  committee  was  considering 
the  subject,  travelling  from  city  to  city,  the  high  railroad 
officials  paid  no  attention  to  us;  rather,  I  might  say,  they 
avoided  being  called  before  us,  probably  considering  it  a  waste 
of  time,  as  they  had  no  serious  thought  that  anything  would 
come  of  the  investigation.  They  considered  the  railroads 
superior  to  the  laws  of  Congress,  and  depended  upon  their 
old  State  charters.  In  those  days  they  were  the  most  ar 
rogant  set  of  men  in  this  country;  they  have  since  learned 
that  they  are  the  servants  and  not  the  masters  of  the  peo 
ple.  But  when  the  bill  seemed  pretty  certain  to  pass,  the 
attitude  of  the  railroad  officials  suddenly  changed.  They 
came  to  Washington  and  complained  that  they  had  not  been 
given  an  opportunity  to  be  heard;  that  it  would  not  be  fair 
under  the  circumstances  to  pass  a  bill  so  largely  affecting 
them;  and  they  seemed  to  be  sorely  aggrieved  when  they 
could  not  prevent  or  delay  its  passage. 

I  introduced  the  bill  in  the  first  session  of  the  Forty- 
ninth  Congress,  and  after  a  great  deal  of  difficulty,  even 
with  my  colleague,  General  Logan,  against  it,  finally  had 
it  made  the  special  order.  General  Logan  knew  nothing 
about  the  subject;  he  cared  nothing  about  it,  and  on  one  oc 
casion  he  told  me  that  I  would  ruin  myself  by  advocating  it. 

When  I  called  the  bill  up  for  consideration,  I  was  so 
anxious  to  press  it  along  that  I  did  not  care  to  make  any 
general  speech,  excepting  to  explain  as  carefully  and  mi 
nutely  as  I  could  the  various  provisions  of  the  measure.  I 
said,  in  opening: 

"I  believe  I  am  justified  in  saying  that  there  is  no  subject  of  a  pub 
lic  nature  that  is  before  the  country  about  which  there  is  so  great 


320     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

unanimity  of  sentiment  as  there  is  upon  the  proposition  that  the  National 
Government  ought  in  some  way  to  regulate  interstate  commerce.  The 
testimony  taken  by  the  Committee  shows  conclusively  to  my  mind,  and  I 
think  to  every  man's  mind  who  reads  it,  that  there  is  necessity  for  some 
legislation  by  the  National  Government,  looking  to  the  regulation  of 
interstate  commerce  by  railroads  and  by  waterways  in  connection  there 
with. 

"I  believe  the  time  has  gone  by  when  it  is  necessary  for  any  one  to 
take  up  the  time  of  the  Senate  in  discussing  the  proposition  that  Con 
gress  has  the  power  to  regulate  interstate  commerce.  These  questions 
have  been  discussed  over  and  over  again  in  Congress,  and  the  highest 
judicial  tribunals  of  the  country  have  decided  over  and  over  again  that 
Congress  has  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  among  the  States.  So  I 
do  not  feel  at  liberty,  if  I  were  disposed,  to  occupy  the  attention  of  the 
Senate  in  discussing  the  general  subject  of  whether  the  people  of  the 
United  States  want  Congress  to  do  anything,  or  whether  there  is  any 
necessity  for  our  doing  anything,  or  the  question  of  constitutional  right 
of  Congress  to  pass  some  act  regulating  commerce  among  the  States. 

"If  the  three  propositions  are  correct:  that  the  public  sentiment  is 
substantially  unanimous  that  we  should  act;  that  the  necessity  for  ac 
tion  exists ;  and  that  the  power  of  Congress  is  admitted, —  the  only  ques 
tion  left  us  is,  what  Congress  ought  to  do  specifically ;  in  other  words,  what 
kind  of  an  act  should  Congress  pass.  The  committee  has  reported  a. 
bill  which  is  the  best  judgment  that  the  committee  had  upon  the  sub 
ject." 

I  then  proceeded  to  explain  the  bill  carefully,  section  by 
section,  and  concluded  by  saying: 

"I  am  led  to  believe  that  the  bill  as  it  stands  is  perhaps  a  more  per 
fect  bill  on  this  subject  than  has  ever  been  introduced  in  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States  before.  There  may  be  many  suggestions  of  amend 
ment  by  honorable  Senators  during  the  consideration  of  the  bill;  and  if 
any  Senator  has  any  suggestion  of  amendment  to  make,  of  course  it 
is  within  the  privilege  of  the  Senate  to  adopt  it,  but  I  am  very  anxious 
that  this  bill  shall  be  as  promptly  considered  as  possible,  and  as 
promptly  acted  upon  and  passed  as  possible,  if  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Senate  it  ought  to  be  passed  at  all. 

"As  the  Senate  know,  this  subject  has  been  up  for  consideration  from 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  321 

one  term  of  Congress  to  another,  almost  time  out  of  mind,  until  the 
people  of  the  United  States  have  come  almost  to  believe  that  there  is  no 
real  purpose  on  the  part  of  Congress  to  do  anything  more  than  introduce 
and  report  bills  and  discuss  them  a  while,  and  then  let  them  die  before 
any  final  action  is  reached  upon  them. 

"I  said  in  the  outset  that  in  my  judgment  there  is  no  public  ques 
tion  before  the  American  people  to-day  about  which  there  is  greater 
unanimity  of  sentiment  than  there  is  upon  the  proposition  that  the  Con 
gress  of  the  United  States  ought  to  enact  some  law  looking  to  the  regu 
lation  of  commerce  among  the  several  States,  and  I  trust  without  taking 
up  the  time  of  the  Senate  longer  that  every  Senator  will  give  attention 
to  this  subject  until  we  can  pass  some  bill  and  get  it  to  the  other  branch 
of  Congress  in  the  hope  that  before  this  session  adjourns  we  shall  get 
some  legislation  on  this  subject  that  will  be  of  some  service  to  the  people 
and  reasonably  satisfy  public  expectation." 

I  pressed  the  bill  on  the  attention  of  the  Senate  every 
day,  never  allowing  it  to  be  displaced  where  I  could  avoid 
it.  I  was  determined  that  some  bill  should  be  passed  at 
that  session.  The  debate  was  long  and  interesting.  There 
were  comparatively  few  set  speeches.  It  was  a  hot,  run 
ning  debate  almost  from  the  beginning,  participated  in  by 
the  strongest  men  in  the  Senate,  many  of  whom  were  the 
ablest  men  of  their  day.  Senators  Aldrich,  Edmunds, 
Evarts,  Gorman,  Hoar,  Ingalls,  Manderson,  Miller,  Mitch 
ell,  Morrill,  Platt,  Sewell,  Sherman,  Spooner,  Teller,  Vest, 
Morgan,  Cameron,  Dawes,  Frye,  Hale,  Harrison,  and 
Voorhees  all  engaged  in  it. 

The  bill  was  finally  passed  May  12,  1886. 

In  the  meantime,  Mr.  Reagan,  of  Texas,  who  had  been 
urging  a  bill  in  the  House,  and  had  it  up  for  consideration 
during  the  same  time  the  Senate  bill  was  being  considered, 
passed  his  bill,  which  differed  essentially  from  the  Senate  bill. 
Both  bills  went  to  conference  together,  Mr.  Reagan  being 
the  head  of  the  conferees  on  the  part  of  the  House,  and  I  be 
ing  the  head  of  the  conferees  on  the  part  of  the  Senate. 


322     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Then  came  the  real  struggle,  the  two  measures  remaining  in 
conference  from  June  to  the  following  January.  The  con 
tention  finally  centred  on  the  pooling  provision.  Reagan 
had  yielded  on  nearly  everything  else;  but  Platt  of  Con 
necticut  was  bound  there  should  be  no  prohibition  against 
pooling.  Reagan  affirmed  that  the  whole  matter  would 
have  to  drop,  that  he  would  never  yield  on  that.  I  came 
back  and  consulted  the  leaders  in  the  Senate,  Allison  among 
others,  and  they  advised  me  to  yield;  that  the  country  de 
manded  a  bill,  and  I  had  better  accept  Reagan's  anti-pool 
ing  prohibition  section  than  offer  no  measure  at  all  —  which 
I  did. 

Whether  it  is  right  or  wrong,  I  do  not  know  even  to  this 
day.  I  have  never  been  quite  certain  in  my  mind  on  the 
question  of  pooling,  and  it  is  still  a  subject  on  which  legis 
lators  and  statesmen  differ.  But  one  thing  does  seem  cer 
tain —  public  sentiment  is  as  much  opposed  to  pooling  to 
day  as  it  was  twenty  years  ago.  There  was  a  great  fight 
in  the  Senate  to  secure  the  adoption  of  the  conference  re 
port.  Its  adoption  was  opposed  by  such  Senators  as 
Cameron,  Frye,  Hawley,  Hoar,  Morrill,  Sawyer,  Sewell, 
Sherman,  and  Spooner.  The  pooling  and  the  long-and- 
short-haul  clauses  were  the  most  fought  over.  Senator 
Platt,  although  a  member  of  the  conference,  made  a  very 
able  speech  on  the  subject  of  pooling,  in  which  he  showed 
considerable  feeling,  and  I  at  one  time  feared  that  he  would 
oppose  the  adoption  of  the  conference  report  on  that  ac 
count  altogether.  He  concluded  a  very  able  address  during 
the  last  days  of  the  consideration  of  the  report,  by  saying: 

"Nine-tenths  of  all  the  interstate  commerce  business  done  to-day  is 
done  under  these  arrangements  which  are  sought  to  be  damned  because 
of  the  evil  meaning  which  has  been  given  to  the  word  'pooling.'  What 
ever  stability  has  been  given  to  the  railroad  business,  and  through  it  to 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  323 

other  business  of  the  country,  has  been  secured  by  these  traffic  arrange 
ments,  and  in  my  judgment  a  bill  which  breaks  them  all  up  ruthlessly 
within  sixty  days,  which  invites  the  competition  which  is  to  demoralize 
business,  will  be  far-reaching  in  its  injurious  results.  For  one  I  pre 
fer  to  stand  by  my  judgment.  I  will  try  to  have  the  courage  of  my 
convictions;  I  will  try  to  do  what  I  believe  to  be  right,  and  I  cannot  as 
sent  to  a  bill  which,  though  I  accept  its  other  provisions,  contains  a  pro 
vision  which  I  regard  as  positively  vicious  and  wrong." 

I  was  greatly  provoked,  almost  outraged,  at  the  manner 
in  which  Senators  opposed  the  adoption  of  the  conference 
report.  It  became  almost  a  personal  matter  with  me,  and 
I  finally  concluded  on  the  very  day  the  vote  was  to  be  taken, 
whether  the  adoption  of  the  report  was  to  be  beaten  or  not, 
that  I  would  make  a  speech,  and  in  that  speech  I  indicated 
just  how  I  felt.  I  said  in  part: 

"I  have  been  sitting  here  to-day  listening  to  the  assaults  upon  this 
bill,  until  I  have  become  almost  convinced  that  I  am  the  most  vicious 
man  toward  the  railroads  of  any  man  I  know.  I  started  in  upon  the 
investigation  of  this  subject  two  or  three  years  ago  with  no  prejudices, 
no  bias  of  sentiment  or  judgment,  no  disposition  whatever  to  do  any 
thing  except  that  which  my  deliberate  judgment  told  me  was  the  best 
thing  to  do.  I  have  believed  I  have  occupied  that  position  ever  since,  until 
within  the  last  twenty-four  hours,  when  the  attacks  upon  this  bill  have 
become  such  that  I  have  become  a  little  doubtful  whether  I  have  not 
been  inspired  from  the  beginning,  so  far  as  my  action  has  been  con 
cerned  with  a  determination  to  destroy  the  railroads  of  this  country. 
To  listen  to  the  Senator  from  Alabama  [Mr.  Morgan]  descanting  upon 
the  provisions  of  the  bill,  one  can  scarcely  resist  the  conclusion  that  it 
is  a  bill  to  destroy  the  commerce  of  the  country,  and  especially  to  break 
down  all  the  railroads. 

"So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I  repeat  I  have  had  no  disposition  of 
that  kind,  and  I  am  unaware  that  either  of  the  Senators  on  the  confer 
ence  committee  have  had  any  such  disposition.  We  tried  to  do  the  best 
we  could  with  the  bill  the  Senate  passed  during  the  last  session,  to  keep 
the  bill  as  near  to  what  the  Senate  had  it  as  we  could  do,  and  to  arrive  at 
an  agreement  between  the  House  and  Senate  conferees. 


324     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"I  submit  that  the  majority  of  the  assaults  have  been  against  pro 
visions  that  were  in  the  bill  when  the  Senate  voted  for  it  during  the  last 
session  of  Congress.  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  if  this  discussion  lasted 
another  day  Senators  would  find  in  every  line  of  the  bill  a  very  serious 
objection  to  its  adoption.  They  started  in  to  object  to  some  portions 
of  the  fourth  and  fifth  sections.  The  Senator  who  has  just  concluded 
his  remarks  got  over  to  the  thirteenth  section  and  I  believe  went  one 
or  two  sections  beyond  that,  and  if  there  are  any  more  speeches  to  be 
made  against  the  bill  I  suppose  the  very  last  section  of  it  will  be  attacked 
before  a  vote  is  taken. 

"The  Senate  conferees  regarded  it  as  their  duty  to  cling  to  every 
portion  of  the  Senate  bill,  as  it  was  passed,  that  they  could  cling  to 
and  reach  an  agreement  between  the  conferees  of  the  House  and  Sen 
ate.  Hence  it  was  that  all  those  portions  of  the  Senate  bill  not  objected 
to  by  the  House  conferees  were  allowed  to  remain  in  the  bill  by  the 
Senate  conferees,  the  Senate  conferees,  as  a  matter  of  course,  believing 
that  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  knew  what  it  was  doing  when  it 
voted  for  the  bill  in  the  first  place,  and  thinking  that  it  remained  of 
the  same  mind  still. 

"The  Senator  from  Georgia  assaults  the  bill  because  he  says  that  under 
it  the  provisions  are  so  rigid  that  the  railroads  of  the  country  can  not 
do  business  at  all.  The  Senator  from  Oregon  assaults  the  bill  because 
he  says  the  fourth  section  amounts  to  nothing,  and  that  the  words  'under 
like  circumstances  and  conditions'  ought  to  be  taken  out. 

"The  Senator  from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Hoar]  assaults  the  bill  be 
cause  he  says  it  is  going  to  interfere  with  foreign  commerce,  and  that 
the  fourth  section  will  be  construed  as  not  allowing  a  rebate  of  five 
cents  a  hundred  upon  commerce  shipped  across  the  country  for  exporta 
tion.  .  .  . 

"So  I  might  go  on  referring  to  every  Senator  who  has  spoken  against 
the  bill,  and  nearly  every  one  of  them  has  founded  his  objections  to  the 
bill  upon  the  use  of  the  language  that  he  had  previously  voted  for  in  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States  before  the  bill  went  to  conference  at  all." 

Men  who  opposed  any  legislation  at  all  never  supposed 
that  the  conference  report  would  be  agreed  to,  and  I  so 
stated  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  I  pointed  out, 
moreover,  that  when  they  were  met  by  a  conference  report 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  325 

the  railroad  men  of  the  Senate  rallied  to  the  support  of  the 
transportation  companies.     I  continued : 

"Sir,  it  has  just  come  to  the  point  where  you  have  got  to  face  the 
music  and  vote  for  an  interstate  commerce  bill,  or  vote  it  down.  That 
is  all  there  is  to  it.  I  have  nothing  more  to  say.  I  have  discharged 
my  duty  as  best  I  knew  how.  I  reported  on  the  part  of  the  Senate 
conferees  the  bill  that  is  before  you.  I  am  not  responsible  for  what  the 
Senate  does  with  it.  I  am  not  going  to  find  fault  with  anybody  upon 
the  question  whether  we  concur  in  the  report  or  reject  it,  but  I  warn 
Senators  that  the  people  of  the  United  States  for  the  last  ten  years 
have  been  struggling  to  assert  the  principle  that  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  has  the  power  to  regulate  transportation  from  one  end  of 
this  country  to  another.  I  believe  that  if  this  report  is  rejected  it  is 
very  doubtful  whether  we  shall  get  any  legislation  at  all  during  the 
present  Congress,  so  when  the  Senate  acts  upon  the  question  my  duty 
will  have  been  done  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  see  it. 

"I  have  believed  from  the  time  I  have  given  any  attention  to  public 
affairs  that  it  was  necessary  to  bring  into  force  the  provisions  of 
the  Constitution  giving  Congress  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  among 
the  States.  The  Senator  from  New  York  [Mr.  Evarts]  attacked  the 
bill  and  said  that  it  was  unconstitutional  because,  as  I  understand  it, 
the  Constitution  was  framed  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating  commerce, 
and  this  was  a  bill  to  hinder  or  to  militate  against  it. 

"I  undertake  to  say  that  the  purpose  of  the  bill,  at  least,  whatever 
may  be  the  strained  construction  which  has  been  placed  upon  it  or 
which  may  be  placed  upon  it  by  the  transportation  companies  of  the 
country,  has  been  to  facilitate  commerce  and  to  protect  the  individual 
rights  of  the  people  as  against  the  great  railroad  corporations.  I  have 
no  disposition  to  interfere  with  their  legitimate  business.  I  have  no 
disposition,  God  knows,  to  interfere  with  the  commerce  of  the  country, 
properly  conducted,  but  I  do  say  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States  to  place  upon  the  statute  book  some  legislation  which 
will  look  to  the  regulation  of  commerce  upon  the  railroads  that  they  will 
not  treat  one  man  differently  under  similar  circumstances  and  condi 
tions. 

"The  Senator  from  Alabama  [Mr.  Morgan]  says  that  we  had  better 
go  slow  and  remain  quiet  under  the  old  regime.  Well,  Mr.  President, 
I  remember  only  a  few  days  ago  hearing  the  Senator  from  Alabama 


326     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

alleging  that  the  railroads,  the  common  carriers  of  the  country,  were 
eating  up  the  people,  were  destroying  the  interests  of  the  people.  I 
do  not  know  whether  he  confined  his  remark  to  his  own  State  or  extended 
it  to  the  country,  but  I  should  have  inferred  from  the  language  he 
used  against  the  railroad  companies  that  he  would  have  been  in  favor 
of  almost  any  legislation  that  would  in  any  way  restrict  them  in  their 
reckless  disregard  of  the  rights  of  the  people.  I  can  only  conclude 
that  the  Senator  from  Alabama  would  rather  that  destructive  system 
should  go  on,  as  he  charged  it  to  exist  when  he  made  his  speech  the 
other  day,  without  control,  than  to  trust  a  commission  who  he  says  are 
individually  liable  to  corrupt  influences  either  at  the  hands  of  the  Presi 
dent  or  somebody  else  outside. 

"Sir,  we  have  got  to  trust  somebody.  We  must  either  leave  this 
matter  to  the  discretion  and  judgment  and  sense  of  honor  of  the  officers 
of  the  railroad  companies,  or  we  must  trust  the  commission  and  the  courts 
of  the  country  to  protect  the  people  against  unjust  discrimination  and 
extortion  on  the  part  of  the  common  carriers.  Is  it  the  President  of 
the  United  States  as  against  a  corporation?  Is  it  an  honest  commission 
honestly  selected  by  the  President  of  the  United  States  as  against  a  rail 
road  company?  I  say  that  there  are  not  those  inducements  to  be  placed 
in  the  hands  of  a  set  of  men  selected  for  their  integrity,  selected  for 
their  ability,  selected  for  their  capacity  to  regulate  railroads  and  enforce 
the  law,  that  are  left  in  the  hands  of  the  officers  of  the  railroad  companies 
themselves. 

"I  take  it  that  there  is  somebody  honest  in  this  country,  and  that  the 
President,  if  this  bill  becomes  a  law,  will  select  the  broadest  gauge  men, 
the  men  highest  in  integrity  and  intelligence  as  the  men  to  enforce  this 
law  as  against  the  corporations  and  as  a  go-between,  if  you  please,  be 
tween  the  shippers  and  the  railroads  of  the  country.  I  am  willing  to 
trust  them.  If  they  are  not  honest  the  President  has  the  right  to  re 
move  them;  and  if  the  shipper  is  unwilling  to  submit  to  their  judgment, 
under  the  bill  he  has  a  right  to  go  directly  to  the  courts.  I  say  that 
there  is  not  anything  that  can  be  done  by  these  corporations  against 
individuals  where  the  shipper  himself  has  not  a  right  to  get  into  court 
in  some  way  or  other,  if  he  is  not  willing  to  abide  by  the  decision  of  the 
commissioners  appointed  by  the  President." 

The  conference  report  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  thirty- 
seven  yeas  to  twelve  nays ;  but  it  was  a  rather  significant  fact 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  327 

that  there  were  twenty-six  absent,  including  Senators  Aid- 
rich,  Dawes,  Evarts,  Morgan,  and  some  of  the  most  bitter 
opponents  of  railroad  regulation. 

The  provisions  of  the  Act  of  1887  are  too  well  known  to 
need  any  recital  here.  In  a  word,  it  was  partly  declaratory 
of  the  common  law,  its  essential  features  being  that  rail 
road  charges  must  be  reasonable;  that  there  must  be  no 
discriminations  between  persons  and  no  preference  between 
localities;  railroads  were  prohibited  from  charging  less  for 
a  long  haul  than  for  a  shorter  haul,  "included  within  it  under 
substantially  similar  circumstances" ;  pooling  was  prohibited ; 
and  a  commission  was  established  with  power  to  hear  and 
decide  complaints,  to  make  investigations  and  reports,  and 
generally  to  see  to  the  enforcement  of  the  Act. 

Considering  the  abuses  that  existed,  the  Act  of  1887  was 
conservative  legislation,  but  in  Congress  and  among  the  peo 
ple  generally  it  was  considered  radical,  until  the  courts 
robbed  it  by  judicial  construction  of  much  of  its  intended 
force.  During  the  debates,  Senators  remarked  that  never 
in  the  history  of  governments  was  a  bill  under  consideration 
which  would  inevitably  affect  directly  or  remotely  so  great 
financial  and  industrial  interests.  It  marked  the  beginning 
of  a  new  era  in  the  management  of  the  railway  business 
of  the  United  States.  It  was  the  beginning  of  Govern 
mental  regulation  which  has  finally  culminated  in  the  legis 
lation  of  the  Sixty-first  Congress.  And  it  is  no  little  satis 
faction  to  me  to  say  that  the  fundamental  principles  of  the 
original  Act  of  1887  have  been  retained  in  all  subsequent 
acts.  No  one  has  seriously  advocated  that  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  Act  of  1887  be  changed,  and  subsequent 
legislation  has  been  built  upon  it. 

After  the  passage  of  the  original  Act  of  1887,  a  per 
manent  Interstate  Committee  of  the  Senate,  of  which  I  had 


328     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  honor  to  be  chairman,  and  in  which  position  I  remained 
for  many  years,  was  created.  It  was  a  very  active  com 
mittee  at  first.  Necessarily,  amendments  were  made  to  the 
law,  and  the  railroads  generally  observed  the  law  in  good 
faith.  Even  the  long-and-short-haul  clause  was  observed, 
as  it  was  intended  by  Congress  that  it  should  be.  That  is, 
the  railroads  did  not  set  up  at  first  that  competition  would 
create  a  dissimilarity  of  conditions  and  circumstances  so  as 
to  justify  them  in  charging  more  for  the  short  than  for 
the  long  haul.  But  it  was  not  many  years  before  the  rail 
roads  attacked  first  one  and  then  another  provision  of  the 
law,  and  they  generally  secured  favorable  decisions  from  the 
courts.  I  do  not  intend  to  go  into  the  details  of  these  de 
cisions,  the  last  one  being  the  decision  in  the  case  which 
held  that  the  Commission  had  no  power  to  fix  a  future  rate, 
because  the  act  did  not  give  it  that  express  power.  My 
own  judgment  is,  and  was  at  the  time,  that  the  original  act 
by  implication  did  give  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com 
mission  the  power  to  say  after  complaint  and  hearing,  and 
after  a  given  rate  had  been  declared  to  be  unreasonable, 
what  in  that  case  would  be  a  reasonable  rate;  but  the  courts 
decided  otherwise.  Immediately,  I  drew  up  and  intro 
duced  a  bill,  number  1439,  of  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress, 
and  had  it  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Com 
merce.  This  bill  contained  provisions  substantially  the  same 
as  were  contained  in  the  Hepburn  Bill  which  passed  the 
Senate  in  1906.  And  in  addition  it  was  designed  to  give 
effect  to  the  provisions  of  the  original  act  which  had  been 
nullified  by  judicial  construction.  I  worked  my  hardest  to 
secure  a  favorable  report  of  this  bill.  We  had  many  hear 
ings  ;  but  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  far  from 
being  in  favor  of  favorably  reporting  the  bill,  were  inclined 
to  decline  to  allow  me  to  report  it  to  the  Senate  at  all.  I 
insisted  that  I  would  report  it  even  though  adversely,  which 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  329 

I  was  finally  permitted  to  do.  But  when  reported  to  the 
Senate  I  stated  that  I  reported  it  adversely  because  a  ma 
jority  of  the  committee  were  against  it,  but  that  I  favored 
the  bill  personally,  and  would  do  what  I  could  to  secure  its 
passage.  This  was  in  the  year  1899. 

It  was  not  until  seven  years  later  that  public  sentiment 
was  aroused  to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  possible  to  secure 
the  amendments  to  the  Act  of  1887  which  were  embodied 
in  Senate  bill  1439. 

I  think  it  is  only  justice  to  myself  to  say  —  and  I  say 
it  with  much  regret  —  that  there  were  two  reasons  why  it 
was  impossible  to  secure  at  that  time  the  report  and  passage 
of  Senate  bill  1439.  First  of  all,  the  Executive  did  not 
manifest  any  special  interest  in  securing  additional  railroad 
regulation.  Secondly,  the  railroads  themselves  had  been 
very  active  in  securing  a  change  of  the  personnel  of  the 
Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  and  men  had  been 
elected  to  the  Senate  and  placed  on  that  committee  whose 
sympathies  were  in  favor  of  very  conservative  regulation, 
if  any  regulation  at  all.  The  railroads  had  firmly  deter 
mined  to  stop  any  further  railroad  regulation.  And  finally, 
in  the  make-up  of  the  Committee,  a  majority  of  Senators 
placed  on  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce  were  men 
whose  sympathies  were  with  the  railroads. 

But  even  with  the  personnel  of  the  committee  made  up 
against  me,  I  have  thought  that  had  the  late  President  Mc- 
Kinley  given  me  the  active  support  which  he  could  have 
given,  I  could  have  secured,  in  1899,  practically  all  the  legis 
lation  that  was  secured  six  years  later.  It  is  only  justice 
to  ex-President  Roosevelt  to  say  that  had  it  not  been  for 
his  earnest  advocacy  of  railroad  rate  regulation  the  Hepburn 
Bill  would  never  have  been  passed.  '  With  a  chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce  well  known  for  his 
conservatism  on  the  subject,  with  a  majority  of  Republicans 


330     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

on  the  committee  in  sympathy  with  him,  without  the  arous 
ing  of  public  sentiment  by  President  Roosevelt,  nothing 
would  have  been  done. 

I  continued  to  take  an  exceptionally  active  part  in  rail 
road  regulation  until  I  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate,  and  even 
afterwards  I  remained  as  the  ranking  member,  next  to  the 
Chairman,  of  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  where 
I  was  glad  to  further  as  best  I  could  such  measures  as  came 
before  the  Committee  in  the  way  of  strengthening  and  giv 
ing  force  to  the  original  act. 

I  consented  very  reluctantly  to  leave  the  chairmanship 
of  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  where  I  had 
served  during  all  my  term  in  the  Senate,  and  I  do  not  be 
lieve  I  would  have  done  so  had  it  not  been  for  the  manner 
in  which  the  committee  was  packed  against  me  in  the  in 
terest  of  non-action.  At  the  last  it  became  so  that  even  the 
simplest  measures  which  affected  the  railroads  in  the  slight 
est  degree  would  receive  adverse  action  or  none  at  all.  I  was 
utterly  disgusted,  and  on  several  occasions  told  prominent 
railroad  men  that  if  they  continued  such  methods  the  time 
would  surely  come  when  the  people  would  become  so  aroused 
that  they  would  see  enacted  the  most  drastic  of  railroad  rate 
laws. 

I  had  much  to  do  with  the  passage  of  the  Hepburn  Act 
of  1906. «  After  President  Roosevelt  had  repeatedly  urged 
it  in  his  inessages  to  Congress,  and  privately  brought  in 
fluence  to  bear  on  Senators,  it  seemed  pretty  certain  that 
public  sentiment  demanded  that  practically  the  amendments 
to  the  original  act  embodied  in  Senate  bill  1439,  to  which 
I  have  already  referred,  would  sooner  or  later  have  to  be 
enacted  into  law.  As  usual,  those  opposed  to  such  legis- 


INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  331 

lation  demanded  that  hearings  be  held,  and  the  Committee 
on  Interstate  Commerce  was  authorized  to  sit  during  the 
recess  of  Congress  and  to  hold  hearings.  Many  weeks  were 
consumed  in  these  hearings,  and  many  volumes  of  testimony 
were  taken.  I  do  not  believe  I  missed  a  session  of  the  com 
mittee,  and  I  tried  as  best  I  could  to  bring  forth  from  the 
numerous  witnesses  summoned  before  the  committee  evi 
dence  to  assist  in  securing  the  passage  of  the  amendments 
to  the  original  act,  which  I  then  thought  necessary  to  per 
fect  it. 

I  had  expected  to  render  what  assistance  I  could  during 
the  next  session,  which  convened  in  December,  in  framing 
the  bill  in  committee  and  to  assist  in  its  passage  in  the  Sen 
ate.  But  very  unfortunately,  just  at  the  beginning  of  the 
next  session  of  Congress,  when  the  hearings  were  all  con 
cluded  and  the  committee  was  prepared  to  go  into  executive 
session  to  consider  the  bill  itself,  I  was  taken  ill  and  com 
pelled  to  spend  a  couple  of  months  in  Florida  to  recover 
my  health.  It  may  seem  strange,  but  the  fact  is,  that  my 
absence  expedited  the  consideration  of  the  bill  by  the  com 
mittee  and  its  report  to  the  Senate.  I  had  telegraphed  and 
written  my  late  colleague,  Senate  Dolliver,  to  record  me  as 
voting  for  the  favorable  report  of  the  bill  from  the  committee 
to  the  Senate.  It  was  expected  that  the  committee  would 
have  to  hold  many  sessions  to  consider  the  numerous  amend 
ments  that  had  been  offered.  Senator  Dolliver,  at  one  of 
the  first  meetings  of  the  committee  called  to  consider  the 
bill,  read  my  telegram  and  letter  asking  to  be  voted  in  favor 
of  reporting  the  bill.  Objection  was  made  to  recording 
me,  and  one  distinguished  Senator  raised  the  point  respecting 
how  I  was  to  be  recorded  on  the  question  of  amendments. 
Considerable  controversy,  I  understand,  took  place,  and 


332     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Senator  Dolliver  then  moved  to  report  the  bill  to  the  Senate 
with  the  amendments  already  adopted  in  committee.  This 
closed  the  discussion  in  the  committee;  the  vote  was  taken, 
and  the  bill  was  ordered  reported  to  the  Senate,  my  vote 
being  recorded  in  the  affirmative;  after  which  Senator  Aid- 
rich,  in  order  to  make  it  appear  all  the  more  ridiculous, 
moved  that  Senator  Tillman,  a  minority  member  of  the  com 
mittee,  be  authorized  to  report  the  bill.  This  motion  pre 
vailed;  Senator  Tillman  did  report  it,  and  he  had  charge 
of  its  passage  in  the  Senate.  So,  as  I  have  stated,  my  ab 
sence,  through  the  controversy  over  counting  my  vote,  really 
expedited  the  bill  through  the  committee. 
V  I  returned  to  my  seat  in  the  Senate  in  February,  while 
the  bill  was  being  considered,  and  assisted  as  best  I  could 
through  conferences  with  President  Roosevelt  and  mem 
bers  of  the  Senate  in  agreeing  on  sections  of  the  bill  which 
were  in  controversy,  particularly  the  court  review  section. 
I  was  also  one  of  the  conferees  on  the  part  of  the  Senate 
that  finally  settled  the  differences  between  the  two  Houses. 
It  was  a  very  satisfactory  bill,  in  the  form  in  which  it 
finally  became  a  law. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

JOHN    MARSHALL    HARLAN 

1HAVE  always  admired  Mr.  Justice  John  Marshall 
Harlan,  who  has  served  some  thirty-three  years  as  a 
member  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and 
who  for  a  time  after  the  death  of  Chief  Justice  Fuller  acted 
as  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States. 

Upon  the  death  of  Judge  Allen,  who  had  for  many  years 
been  United  States  District  Judge  for  the  Southern  Dis 
trict  of  Illinois,  it  was  suggested  that  his  portrait  be  placed 
in  the  court  room  of  the  United  States  Circuit  and  District 
Court  at  Springfield,  Illinois.  The  movement  developed 
into  the  broader  suggestion  that  portraits  of  other  dis 
tinguished  judges,  who  had  presided  over  the  United  States 
Court  at  Springfield,  and  also  a  portrait  of  Chief  Justice 
Marshall,  be  procured  and  added  to  the  collection.  The 
portraits  of  Judges  John  Marshall,  Walter  Q.  Gresham, 
David  Davis,  Samuel  H.  Treat,  Thomas  Drummond,  William 
J.  Allen,  John  McLean,  Nathaniel  Pope,  and  John  Marshall 
Harlan  were  procured,  and  it  was  planned  that  a  suitable 
ceremony  should  take  place  in  Springfield  on  June  2,  1903. 

Judge  Humphrey  wrote  me,  telling  me  of  the  plans  of 
the  committee  appointed  by  the  Bar  of  the  United  States 
Court  at  Springfield,  and  asking  me  to  say  something  con 
cerning  any  one  of  these  distinguished  judges  whom  I  might 
designate,  leaving  the  selection  to  me. 

I  thought  the  matter  over  and  determined  that,  inasmuch 
as  I  had  known  Justice  Harlan  more  or  less  intimately  ever 

333 


334     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

since  I  became  a  member  of  the  Senate,  I  should  like  to 
talk  about  him. 

The  occasion  was  quite  a  notable  one.  Vice-President 
Fairbanks  delivered  an  address  on  Judge  Gresham;  Judge 
Kohlsaat,  on  Chief  Justice  Marshall;  Lawrence  Weldon, 
on  David  Davis;  Judge  Creighton,  on  Samuel  H.  Treat; 
Mr.  John  M.  Jewett,  on  Thomas  Drummond;  J.  C.  Allen, 
on  W.  J.  Allen;  Mr.  Logan  Hay,  on  John  McLean;  Gen 
eral  Alfred  Orendorff,  on  Nathaniel  Pope;  and  the  por 
traits  were  accepted  in  the  name  of  the  Court  at  Spring 
field  by  the  Hon.  J.  Otis  Humphrey,  the  District  Judge. 

There  was  a  very  distinguished  gathering  of  lawyers,  of 
Federal  and  State  judges  from  Illinois  and  adjacent  States, 
and  of  many  members  of  the  families  of  the  deceased  jurists. 
Judges  Kohlsaat,  Humphrey,  and  Anderson  occupied  the 
bench.  The  whole  proceeding  was  a  very  dignified  and  ap 
propriate  one. 

I  cannot  give  a  better  estimate  of  my  regard  for  Justice 
Harlan  than  by  quoting  some  extracts  from  the  address  I 
delivered  on  that  occasion: 

"The  Supreme  Court  to-day  is  composed  of  nine  eminent  justices, 
of  one  of  whom  I  have  been  asked  to  speak;  and  I  do  believe  that  the 
Justice  of  whom  I  speak,  in  all  that  goes  to  make  a  noted  and  able  jurist, 
is  second  only  to  that  learned  Chief  Justice,  John  Marshall,  of  whom 
Judge  Kohlsaat  has  so  interestingly  spoken. 

"I  speak  of  John  Marshall  Harlan,  who  has  been  an  honored  mem 
ber  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  for  more  than  a  quarter 
of  a  century. 

"Justice  Harlan  from  his  youth  was  the  architect  of  his  own  fortune; 
he  has  been  a  man  of  remarkable  individuality  and  force  of  character; 
he  impressed  himself  from  boyhood  upon  the  community  in  which  he 
lived.  Before  he  reached  his  nineteenth  year  he  was  made  Adjutant- 
General  of  the  State  of  Kentucky.  Like  Lincoln,  he  performed  the  obli 
gations  of  a  citizen,  both  in  private  and  official  life,  with  zeal  and  faith 
fulness  to  duty.  .  • 


JOHN  MARSHALL  HARLAN  335 

"When  Justice  Harlan  was  but  a  young  man,  slavery  became  the  para 
mount  issue  of  the  day,  and  naturally  being  a  staunch  Union  man,  he 
took  an  active  part  in  the  discussions  and  struggles  that  became  more 
or  less  bitter  in  his  very  early  manhood.  He  was  one  of  the  first  to 
enlist  and  lead  his  regiment  in  the  field  in  favor  of  the  Union  and  was 
assigned  a  place  in  that  division  of  the  army  commanded  by  the  gallant 
old  soldier  and  patriot,  General  Thomas.  .  .  • 

"Justice  Harlan's  record  as  a  soldier  was  a  brilliant  one.  Certain 
promotion  and  higher  honors  were  assured  him,  and  he  was  nominated 
by  President  Lincoln  to  the  position  of  Brigadier-General;  but  the  re 
sponsibilities  resulting  from  the  death  of  his  father  compelled  him  to 
abandon  what  was  certain  to  have  been  a  distinguished  military  career, 
and  he  reluctantly  returned  to  Kentucky. 

"Following  the  struggle  in  arms  came  important  reconstruction  legis 
lation  and  important  Constitutional  amendments,  necessitating  judicial 
interpretations.  These  grave  questions  of  state  gave  opportunity  for  the 
development  of  great  statesmen  and  judges. 

"Great  crises  produce  great  men.  Justice  Harlan  was  at  home  in 
the  thickest  of  the  struggle,  through  the  period  of  reconstruction,  an 
able  lawyer,  an  uncompromisingly  bold  man,  asserting  his  position  with 
out  fear  or  favor.  While  many  of  the  important  judicial  and  Constitu 
tional  questions  growing  out  of  reconstruction  legislation  remained  un 
settled,  Justice  Harlan  took  his  place  on  the  Supreme  Bench,  having 
been  appointed  by  President  Hayes  in  1877,  and  an  examination  of  the 
decisions  of  the  Court  since  that  year  will  show  the  prominent  part  he 
has  taken  in  the  disposition  of  these  Constitutional  questions. 

"It  has  been  said  that  there  never  was  a  very  powerful  character, 
a  truly  masculine,  commanding  man,  who  was  not  made  so  by  struggles 
with  great  difficulties.  Daily  observation  and  history  prove  the  truth 
of  this  statement.  Hence  I  believe  that  the  rough-and-tumble  existence 
to  which  the  majority  of  ambitious  young  men  of  our  country  are  sub 
jected,  does  much  to  prepare  them  for  the  higher  duties  of  substantial, 
valuable  citizenship.  The  active  life  and  early  struggles  of  Justice  Har 
lan  in  his  State  have  had  their  influence  in  making  him  the  fearless  jurist 
that  he  is. 

"Shortly  after  his  appointment,  Justice  Harlan  was  assigned  as  the 
Supreme  Justice  for  this  circuit,  and  served  here  for  eighteen  years. 
Many  of  you  present  remember  his  visit  to  Springfield  and  his  holding 
court  in  this  room. 


336     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"To  be  a  member  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  is  the  highest  honor  that 
can  be  conferred  upon  an  American  lawyer.  The  crowning  -  glory  of 
our  Nation  was  the  establishment,  by  the  fathers,  of  the  independent 
Federal  Judiciary,  which  is  the  conservator  of  the  Constitution.  I  have 
unbounded  faith  in  it.  It  is  the  protector  of  those  fundamental  lib 
erties  so  dear  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  race.  State  Legislatures  and  the 
Congress  may  be  swayed  by  the  heat  and  passion  of  the  hour;  but  so 
long  as  our  independent  Federal  Judiciary  remains,  our  people  are  safe 
in  their  legal,  fundamental,  Constitutional  rights. 

"Perhaps  there  is  nothing  that  illustrates  so  well  Justice  Harlan's 
character,  the  equality  of  all  men  before  the  law,  as  do  some  of  his 
dissenting  opinions." 

I  then  referred  to  his  famous  dissent  in  the  Civil  Rights 
case,  delivered  in  1883;  to  his  dissent  in  the  Income  Tax 
case,  and  others  of  his  notable  utterances  from  the  Supreme 
Bench;  and  at  the  same  time  I  referred  to  the  fact  that  he 
had  written  more  than  seven  hundred  opinions,  covering 
nearly  every  branch  of  the  law,  the  opinions  on  Constitu 
tional  questions  being  unusually  large.  I  added: 

"In  many  respects  Justice  Harlan  resembles  his  namesake,  John 
Marshall.  Like  John  Marshall,  he  received  his  early  training  for  the 
bench  in  the  active  practice  at  the  Bar.  Like  John  Marshall,  he  en 
listed  and  fought  for  his  country.  Like  John  Marshall,  while  still  a 
young  man,  he  was  appointed  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  has 
for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  occupied  that  position.  And  like 
John  Marshall,  his  great  work  on  the  bench  has  been  in  cases  involving 
the  construction  and  application  of  the  Constitution.  He  has  been  espe 
cially  assigned  by  the  Court  to  the  writing  of  opinions  on  Constitu 
tional  Law.  In  my  opinion  he  stands  to-day  as  the  greatest  living 
Constitutional  lawyer. 

"If  the  Court  please,  I  desire  to  refer  to  one  more  phase  of  Justice 
Harlan's  character.  He  is  a  religious  man.  He  does  not  parade  his  be 
lief  before  the  world,  yet  he  possesses  deep  and  devout  convictions  and 
has  given  deep  study  to  church  questions.  And  it  may  be  said  that  the 
great  men  of  the  world  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  civilization,  with  but 
few  exceptions,  have  believed  that  the  life  of  the  soul  does  not  end  with 


JOHN  MARSHALL  HARLAN  337 

the  death  of  the  body.  Cicero,  long  before  the  birth  of  the  Saviour, 
said: 

"  'When  I  consider  the  wonderful  activity  of  the  mind,  so  great  a 
memory  of  what  has  passed,  and  such  a  capacity  of  penetrating  into  the 
future;  when  I  behold  such  a  number  of  arts  and  sciences,  and  such  a 
multitude  of  discoveries  thence  arising,  I  believe  and  am  firmly  per 
suaded  that  a  nature  which  contains  so  many  things  within  itself  can  not 
be  mortal/  Centuries  later  the  famous  Dr.  Johnson  well  said:  'How 
gloomy  would  be  the  mansions  of  the  dead  to  him  who  did  not  know 
that  he  should  never  die;  that  what  now  acts  shall  continue  its  agency, 
and  what  now  thinks  shall  think  on  for  ever/ 

"Justice  Harlan  is  a  firm  and  devout  believer  in  the  immortality  of  the 
soul. 

"He  is  now  approaching  the  age  when  under  the  law  he  may  retire 
from  the  bench,  yet  he  is  in  the  vigor  of  health  and  is  perhaps  the  greater 
judge  to-day  than  at  any  time  in  his  past  career.  I  am  sure  I  voice  the 
general  desire  of  the  Bar  of  the  whole  country  that  he  shall,  so  long 
as  his  health  and  strength  continue,  remain  an  active  member  of  that 
great  Court." 

It  is  more  than  eight  years  since  I  delivered  that  ad 
dress.  In  the  ensuing  period,  five  justices  of  the  Supreme 
Court  have  either  retired  under  the  law,  or  passed  away, 
none  of  whom  enjoyed  a  length  of  service  equal  to  Judge 
Harlan's;  and  yet  Justice  Harlan  is  attending  daily  to  his 
duties  as  a  member  of  that  court,  apparently  in  vigorous 
health  and  certainly  as  profound  and  learned  a  judge  to 
day  as  at  any  time  in  his  past  career.  And  I  repeat  now 
what  I  said  eight  years  ago  —  that  I  hope  he  shall  for 
years  to  come  remain  an  active  member  of  that  great  court. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

MEMBERS   OF   THE    COMMITTEE   ON    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

IT  has  been  said  that  Charles  Sumner  considered  the  chair 
manship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  as  the 
highest  honor  that  could  have  been  conferred  upon  him  by 
the  United  States  Senate. 

I  have  been  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions  for  a  longer  consecutive  period  than  any  man  in  our 
history,  aside  from  Mr.  Sumner,  who  served  as  chairman 
for  ten  years.  If  I  continue  as  chairman  during  the  re 
mainder  of  my  term,  I  shall  have  exceeded  the  long  service 
of  Mr.  Sumner. 

The  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  was  among  the 
first  of  the  permanent  standing  committees  of  the  Senate. 
Prior  to  1816,  there  were  no  permanent  standing  com 
mittees,  the  custom  being  to  appoint  select  committees  to 
consider  the  different  portions  of  the  President's  messages, 
and  for  the  consideration  of  any  other  subject  which  the 
Senate  might  from  session  to  session  determine  necessary 
for  committee  reference.  On  December  13,  1816,  the 
Senate,  by  rule,  proceeded  to  the  appointment  of  the  fol 
lowing  standing  committees,  agreeably  to  the  resolution  of 
the  tenth  instant,  which  was  as  follows : 

"Resolved,  that  it  shall  be  one  of  the  rules  of  the  Senate  that  the 
following  standing  committees  be  appointed  at  each  session:  A  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  a  Committee  on  Finance,  a  Committee  on 
Commerce  and  Manufactures,  a  Committee  on  Military  Affairs,  a  Commit 
tee  on  the  Militia,  a  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs,  a  Committee  on  Public 

338 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    339 

Lands,  a  Committee  on  Claims,  a  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  a  Com 
mittee  on  Post-offices  and  Post-roads,  and  a  Committee  on  Pensions." 

It  will  be  noted  that  under  this  rule,  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations  was  named  first,  and  Mr.  B arbour,  of 
Virginia,  was  its  first  chairman.  Whether  it  was  at  that 
time  considered  the  most  important  committee,  I  do  not 
know;  but  I  do  know  that  from  the  date  of  its  formation,  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  has  been  among  the  most 
important  committees  of  the  Senate,  and  at  times  in  our  his 
tory  it  has  been  the  most  important  committee.  It  has  been 
from  the  beginning  particularly  noted  for  the  high  charac 
ter  of  the  men  who  composed  its  membership,  and  we  find 
in  the  archives  of  the  Senate  the  names  of  some  of  the  great 
est  men  in  our  national  history,  who  have  from  time  to  time 
acted  as  its  chairmen. 

Barbour  of  Virginia,  Henry  Clay,  James  Buchanan, 
Rives,  Bentori,  King,  Cass,  Sumner,  Windom,  John  F. 
Miller,  John  T.  Morgan,  John  Sherman,  and  Cushman  K. 
Davis  are  a  few  of  those  who  have  at  different  times  oc 
cupied  the  position  of  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations. 

My  predecessors,  as  their  names  will  indicate  to  those 
familiar  with  American  history,  have  been  noted  for  their 
conservatism  in  dealing  with  matters  pertaining  to  our  for 
eign  relations,  and  there  is  no  position  in  the  Senate  where 
conservatism  is  so  essential.  My  ambition  has  been  so  to 
conduct  the  business  coming  before  the  committee  as  to  keep 
up  the  high  standard  set  and  the  high  standing  maintained 
by  the  distinguished  statesmen  who  have  preceded  me  in  the 
position. 

The  work  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  is  almost 
exclusively  executive  and  confidential,  and  consists  largely 
in  the  consideration  of  treaties  submitted  by  the  President 


340     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

to  the  Senate  for  ratification.  Very  little  important  legis 
lative  business  comes  before  this  committee,  although  it  has 
jurisdiction  over  claims  of  foreign  citizens  against  the  United 
States,  and  all  legislation  that  in  anywise  affects  our  rela 
tions  with  other  nations. 

It  was  almost,  I  might  say,  by  accident  that  I  became  a 
member  of  this  important  committee.  I  had  been  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Committee  on  Commerce  for  a  number  of  years, 
and  took  quite  an  interest  in  the  very  important  legislation 
coming  before  that  committee;  and  the  improvement  of 
rivers  and  harbors  was  a  subject  in  which  Illinois  was  greatly 
interested. 

The  late  Senator  Mitchell,  of  Oregon,  was  in  1895  chair 
man  of  the  Committee  on  Organization,  having  in  charge 
the  make-up  of  the  committees  of  the  Senate,  and  he  wanted 
a  place  on  the  Committee  on  Commerce  for  some  Western 
Senator.  He  came  to  me  and  explained  his  embarrassment, 
and  asked  me  if  I  would  be  willing  to  be  transferred  from 
the  Committee  on  Commerce  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations.  I  wanted  to  accommodate  Senator  Mitchell,  and 
I  told  him  that  I  would  consent  to  be  transferred,  but  at 
the  same  time  I  was  not  at  all  anxious  to  leave  the  Com 
mittee  on  Commerce.  The  transfer  was  made  in  due  course, 
and  I  have  served  continuously  on  the  Foreign  Relations 
Committee  since  that  time,  1895. 

John  Sherman  was  chairman  of  the  committee  when  I 
became  a  member  of  it.  It  was  at  a  period  when  there  were 
very  few  material  foreign  matters  to  engage  the  attention 
of  the  Senate.  Sherman  served  as  chairman  of  the  com 
mittee,  at  different  periods,  for  nearly  ten  years.  He  was 
a  wise,  conservative  chairman;  not  especially  brilliant,  as 
was  Senator  Davis,  or  Senator  Sumner;  but  every  one  had 


CUSHMAN   K.  DAVIS 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    341 

confidence  in  him  and  felt  that  in  his  hands  nothing  unwise 
or  foolish  would  emanate  from  the  committee. 

I  was  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce 
at  that  time,  and  the  work  of  that  committee,  added  to  the 
work  devolving  upon  me  as  a  member  of  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations,  engrossed  most  of  my  time;  and  while  I 
regularly  attended  the  meetings  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations,  I  cannot  say  that  I  took  a  prominent  part, 
or,  indeed,  a  very  deep  interest,  in  it  until  I  became  its 
chairman,  succeeding  the  late  Cushman  K.  Davis  in  1901. 

Cushman  K.  Davis  was  a  warm  personal  friend  of  mine. 
As  the  years  passed  by  and  I  grew  to  know  him  more  and 
more  intimately,  I  became  more  deeply  attached  to  him, 
and  my  respect  for  him  as  a  statesman  constantly  increased. 
He  was  what  I  would  term  a  specialist  in  legislation.  He 
took  little  or  no  interest  in  any  other  subject  than  matters 
pertaining  to  our  foreign  relations.  He  was  a  prominent 
figure  in  public  affairs  for  many  years.  A  soldier  in  the 
Civil  War,  serving  in  many  prominent  places  in  civil  af 
fairs  in  his  State,  including  the  position  of  Governor,  he 
came  to  the  Senate  as  a  ripened  statesman.  He  entered 
the  Senate  in  1887,  and  in  1891  became  a  member  of  the 
Foreign  Relations  Committee,  and  very  early  became  one 
of  its  leading  members.  Succeeding  the  late  Senator  Sher 
man,  in  1897,  he  became  its  chairman  and  served  in  that 
position  until  his  death.  Few  more  scholarly  or  cultivated 
men  have  ever  occupied  a  seat  in  the  Senate. 

He  was  a  peculiar  man  in  many  respects,  and  did  not 
court,  or  even  encourage,  the  advice  of  his  colleagues  on 
the  committee,  or  even  of  the  Secretary  of  State.  I  had 
served  on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  of  the  House 
when  Mr.  Seward  was  Secretary  of  State  and  I  knew  what 


342     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

a  help  it  was  to  the  committee  to  have  the  Secretary  meet 
with  us  personally  and  discuss  matters  of  more  or  less  im 
portance.  We  all  listened  to  Secretary  Seward  with  the 
profoundest  respect  and  attention;  but  as  I  look  back  on 
it  now,  I  think  that  Secretary  Seward  probably  enter 
tained  more  than  he  instructed  the  members.  He  seemed 
to  enjoy  attending  the  sessions. 

I  thought  that  it  would  be  a  help  if  we  could  have  Mr. 
Olney,  then  Secretary  of  State,  before  us.  I  suggested  to 
Senator  Davis  at  one  meeting,  that  Secretary  Olney  should 
be  invited  to  come  and  explain  some  question  concerning 
which  we  seemed  to  be  in  doubt.  Senator  Davis  declined 
to  invite  him,  and  said  so  in  so  many  words.  Apparently 
he  did  not  desire  any  interference  or  information  from  the 
Executive  Department.  I  felt  pretty  free  to  express  my 
opinion  to  Senator  Davis,  and  I  told  him  that  inasmuch  as 
he  did  not  care  to  invite  Secretary  Olney,  I  would  invite 
him  myself,  if  he  did  not  object.  I  did  so,  and  Secretary 
Olney,  at  a  subsequent  meeting,  met  with  the  committee 
and  very  quickly  explained  the  question  under  consideration. 

Senator  Davis  was  a  well  recognized  authority  on  inter 
national  law,  both  as  a  lecturer  on  that  subject  and  a  writer. 
Judging  from  his  display  of  ability,  he  ought  to  have  been 
able  to  write  a  monumental  work  on  the  subject.  But  he 
was  an  indolent  man  and  contented  himself  with  publish 
ing  merely  a  little  volume  containing  a  resume  of  his 
lectures  before  a  Washington  college  of  law.  The  publica 
tion  of  this  work  detracted  from,  rather  than  added  to,  his 
reputation  as  a  student  and  writer. 

He  was  not  an  orator,  but  on  occasions,  in  executive  ses 
sion,  when  great  international  questions  were  before  the 
Senate,  I  have  heard  him  deliver  wonderfully  eloquent 
speeches.  He  always  commanded  the  closest  attention 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    343 

whenever  he  spoke  in  the  Senate,  whether  in  executive  or 
open  session  (which  latter  he  only  infrequently  did,  by  the 
way),  and  he  always  exhausted  the  subject. 

President  McKinley  appointed  him  a  member  of  the  Paris 
Peace  Commission  to  frame  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain. 
How  well  he  performed  that  service  those  of  his  colleagues 
on  the  commission  who  are  still  living,  can  attest.  He 
returned  from  Paris  and  had  charge  of  the  ratification  of  the 
treaty  in  the  Senate. 

I  have  always  believed  that  Senator  Davis's  death  was 
the  result  of  his  indolent  habits.  I  do  not  believe  he  ever 
took  any  physical  exercise;  at  least  he  did  not  do  so  during 
the  time  that  I  knew  him.  He  was  so  much  of  a  student,  and 
so  interested  in  books,  that  he  seemed  to  think  that  time  de 
voted  to  the  proper  care  of  his  physical  condition  was  so 
much  time  wasted.  The  result  was  that  when  disease  at 
tacked  him  he  became  an  easy  prey,  and  when  he  passed  away 
it  was  said  that  he  bore  all  the  marks  of  a  very  old  man,  even 
though  he  was  comparatively  young  in  years.  It  was  my 
sad  duty,  as  a  member  of  the  United  States  Senate,  to  attend 
his  funeral  in  St.  Paul,  in  1900. 

The  northwest  section  of  the  United  States  has  not  now, 
and  never  had  before,  as  capable  a  scholar  and  statesman  as 
Cushman  K.  Davis. 

I  succeeded  Senator  Davis  as  chairman  of  the  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations.  I  have  enjoyed  my  work  on  the  com 
mittee  more  than  I  have  enjoyed  any  other  work  that  I  have 
done  in  the  Senate.  There  are  a  number  of  reasons  for  this. 
First,  the  members  of  the  committee,  during  my  service, 
have  been  particularly  able  and  agreeable  men,  and  during 
those  years  some  of  the  greatest  men  of  the  Senate  have 
been  numbered  among  its  members.  Aside  from  one,  whom 
I  have  long  since  forgiven,  I  do  not  recall  now  that  I  have 


344     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

had  a  single  controversy  or  unkind  word  with  any  member. 
In  addition,  the  work  is  not  only  of  the  greatest  impor 
tance,  but  it  has  been  very  satisfactory,  because  partisan 
ship  has  not  at  all  entered  into  the  disposition  of  matters 
pertaining  to  our  foreign  affairs.  The  members  of  the  com 
mittee  during  my  time  have  always  seemed  to  take  a  deep  in 
terest  in  the  work  coming  before  them,  and,  unlike  most  of 
the  committees  of  the  Senate,  it  has  never  been  difficult  to 
secure  the  attendance  of  a  working  quorum.  In  the  ten 
years  that  I  have  been  chairman,  I  do  not  believe  the  com 
mittee  has  ever  been  compelled  to  adjourn  for  want  of  a 
quorum  when  any  important  business  was  before  it. 

Until  his  death  in  1911,  Senator  Wm.  P.  Frye,  of  Maine, 
was  in  point  of  service  the  oldest  member  of  the  committee. 
He  had  served  as  one  of  its  members  ever  since  1885.  He 
could  have  been  chairman,  by  right  of  seniority,  when  Mr. 
Davis  was  made  chairman  in  1891,  on  the  retirement  of  Mr. 
Sherman;  and  again  he  could  have  become  chairman  when 
Senator  Davis  died.  He  did  act  in  that  capacity  for  nearly 
a  year,  but  he  always  seemed  to  prefer  the  chairmanship  of 
the  Committee  on  Commerce. 

I  believe  that  the  late  Senator  Hanna  had  a  good  deal  to 
do  with  Senator  Frye's  declining  to  succeed  the  late  Senator 
Davis  as  chairman.  Ship-subsidy  and  the  building  up  of 
the  merchant  marine  of  the  United  States  were  then  before 
the  Senate,  and  Senator  Hanna,  a  ship  owner  himself,  was 
deeply  interested  in  that  legislation.  Senator  Hanna  and 
Senator  Frye  were  devoted  friends;  and,  although  I  do  not 
know,  I  have  always  felt  that  it  was  Senator  Hanna  who  in 
duced  Senator  Frye  to  remain  at  the  head  of  the  Committee 
on  Commerce. 

Senator  Frye  was  a  very  capable  and  faithful  Senator, 
and  enjoyed  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the  people  of 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    345 

his  State  to  a  greater  degree  than  any  other  Maine  states 
man,  with  the  exception  of  Mr.  Elaine.  As  chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Commerce,  I  would  say  he  dominated  that 
committee,  and  at  the  same  time  he  was  a  most  satisfactory 
chairman  to  every  Senator  who  served  on  it.  He  was  thor 
oughly  familiar  with  every  question  pertaining  to  rivers  and 
harbors,  the  shipping  interests,  and  the  multitude  of  matters 
coming  before  the  committee.  Senator  Burton,  of  Ohio,  is 
probably  the  only  member  of  the  United  States  Senate  at 
present  who  is  as  well  posted  on  matters  before  the  Com 
mittee  on  Commerce. 

Mr.  Frye  was  an  active  member  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations,  and  during  the  brief  periods  when  I  have 
been  compelled  by  reason  of  illness  to  remain  away  from 
the  Senate  I  always  designated  Senator  Frye  to  act  in  my 
stead. 

Among  his  colleagues  in  the  Senate,  he  enjoyed  the  great 
est  degree  of  popularity ;  and  aside  from  one  or  two  occasions 
when  his  own  colleague  opposed  him,  no  Senator  ever  ob 
jected  to  any  ordinary  bill  which  Senator  Frye  called  up 
and  asked  to  have  placed  on  its  passage.  In  fact  it  was  his 
custom  to  report  a  bill  from  his  committee,  or  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  the  only  two  working  com 
mittees  of  which  he  was  a  member,  and  ask  for  its  immediate 
consideration.  No  one  ever  objected,  and  the  bill  went 
through  as  a  meritorious  measure  without  question,  on  his 
word  alone  to  the  Senate. 

He  was  an  ideal  presiding  officer.  For  years  he  was  presi 
dent  pro  tempore,  and  the  death  of  Vice-President  Hobart, 
and  the  accession  of  Mr.  Roosevelt  to  the  Presidency,  neces 
sitated  his  almost  constant  occupancy  of  the  chair.  With 
the  peculiar  rules  existing  in  the  Senate,  the  position  of  pre 
siding  officer  is  comparatively  an  easy  one.  Senator  Frye 
made  an  especially  agreeable  presiding  officer,  expediting  the 


346     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

business  of  the  Senate  in  a  degree  equal  to  that  of  any  presid 
ing  officer  during  my  service. 

I  recollect  when  he  was  elected  president  pro  tempore,  in 
1896, 1  had  been  talked  of  for  the  place,  but  he  had  not  heard 
that  I  desired  it;  and  a  Republican  caucus  was  held  which 
named  him  president.  Senator  Chandler,  for  whom  I  have 
always  had  the  greatest  respect  as  a  man  and  as  a  Senator, 
after  the  caucus  was  held  told  Senator  Frye  that  he  had 
heard  I  had  some  ambition  for  the  place.  Mr.  Frye  came 
at  once  to  my  house  and  to  my  study  and  asked  me,  in  so 
many  words,  if  I  had  desired  to  be  president  of  the  Senate. 
I  replied  that  I  had  not,  adding  that  I  had  had  no  particular 
concern  about  it  at  any  time.  He  thereupon  asserted  that 
he  had  called  simply  to  apprise  me  that  whenever  I  wanted 
the  position  he  would  very  cheerfully  resign  and  yield  it  to 
me.  I  assured  him  that  if  he  did  not  yield  it  until  I  asked 
him  to  do  so,  he  would  hold  it  for  a  long  time.  He  never 
had  any  opposition,  and  on  both  sides  of  the  chamber  he  was, 
as  presiding  officer,  equally  popular.  He  voluntarily  re 
linquished  the  office  at  the  beginning  of  the  Sixty-second 
Congress. 

When  the  tariff  was  one  of  the  issues  —  during  the  first 
Cleveland,  the  Harrison,  and  the  second  Cleveland  cam 
paigns  and  to  a  lesser  degree  in  1896  and  1900, —  Senator 
Frye  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  foremost  orators  and  stump 
speakers  on  the  tariff  question.  During  his  later  years  it 
was  very  much  to  be  regretted  that  he  did  not  feel  able  to 
take  an  active  part  in  national  campaigns. 

The  news  of  Senator  Frye's  death  comes  to  me  while  I 
am  engaged  in  reading  the  proof  of  what  I  have  said  about 
him  in  this  book.  He  died  at  four  o'clock  on  the  eighth  day 
of  August,  1911,  passing  away  at  the  age  of  eighty-one 
years.  When  asked  by  a  newspaper  man  for  a  brief  estimate 
of  Mr.  Frye's  character,  I  said:  "He  was  not  only  one  of 


WILLIAM    P.  FRYE 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    347 

the  ablest  and  most  devoted  of  public  servants,  but  one  of  the 
most  charming  men  that  I  have  ever  known."  This  expres 
sion  I  desire  to  repeat  here  for  perpetuation  in  endurable 
form. 

Seldom  has  this  country  commanded  the  services  of  a  more 
enlightened  or  more  self-sacrificing  man  than  Mr.  Frye. 
He  was  patriotic  to  the  very  heart's  core ;  no  sacrifice  for  the 
country  would  have  been  too  great  for  him.  He,  and  his 
colleague  Mr.  Hale,  and  Senators  Allison,  of  Iowa,  Platt,  of 
Connecticut,  Teller,  of  Colorado,  Cockrell,  of  Missouri,  Mor 
gan,  of  Alabama,  and  Spooner,  of  Wisconsin,  constitute  a 
coterie  of  public  men  of  the  last  half  century  such  as  any 
nation  should  be  proud  of.  Unselfish,  energetic,  and  patri 
otic,  they  have  done  much  to  keep  the  United  States  on  the 
proper  level.  Let  us  hope,  as  we  must,  that  the  public  coun 
cils  of  the  nation  may  always  be  guided  by  men  of  their 
character  and  abilities. 

Senator  Frye's  death  leaves  me  the  oldest  member  of  the 
Senate  in  point  of  service.  He  entered  the  Senate  in  March, 
1881,  giving  him  more  than  thirty  years  of  service,  while  I 
entered  in  March,  1883,  which  gives  me  more  than  twenty- 
eight  years  up  to  date.  It  thus  will  be  seen  that  we  have 
served  together  for  almost  an  average  lifetime. 

Senator  Jacob  H.  Gallinger  of  New  Hampshire,  who  was 
promoted  from  the  House  to  the  Senate  in  1891,  now  be 
comes  the  second  member  of  the  latter  body  in  respect  to 
length  of  service.  Mr.  Gallinger  is  not  a  member  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  of  whose  membership  I 
am  now  especially  speaking,  but  it  cannot  be  out  of  place  for 
me  to  pause  here  to  give  him  a  word  of  commendation  and 
salutation  as  I  pursue  my  way  through  this  maze  of  mem 
ory.  A  physician  by  profession,  and  a  native  of  Canada, 
Mr.  Gallinger  has  shown  marked  adaptability  in  taking  on 


348     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  American  spirit  and  in  performing  the  public's  service. 
He  has  for  many  years  been  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Com 
mittee  on  the  District  of  Columbia,  which,  possessing  many 
of  the  attributes  of  an  ordinary  city  council,  requires  minute 
attention  to  detail.  Mr.  Gallinger  is  the  second  member  of 
the  important  Committee  on  Commerce,  and  one  of  the  lead 
ing  members  of  the  Committee  on  Appropriations.  His 
committee  work  therefore  covers  a  wide  range  of  subjects. 
Never  has  he  been  known  to  fail  in  the  performance  of  his 
duties  in  all  these  connections.  Moreover,  he  is  a  constant 
attendant  upon  the  sessions  of  the  Senate,  and  one  of  the 
most  alert  of  its  members.  Apparently,  often,  he  is  im 
pulsive  and  explosive,  and  occasionally  under  the  excitement 
of  debate  says  what  seems  to  be  a  harsh  thing.  If,  however, 
his  manner  is  indicative  of  feeling,  such  a  feeling,  like  a 
passing  summer  cloud,  is  soon  dissipated,  and  almost  im 
mediately  gives  way  to  the  sunshine  of  his  really  genial  and 
lovable  nature.  Senator  Gallinger  as  a  member  of  the 
House  and  Senate  has  given  the  American  public  as  much 
genuine  and  patriotic  service  as  any  man  in  public  life  dur 
ing  the  past  quarter  of  a  century.  I  hope  he  may  continue 
long  to  adorn  the  Senate. 

Senator  John  T.  Morgan,  of  Alabama,  was  appointed  a 
member  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  in  1879,  and 
served  continuously  as  a  member  of  it  until  his  death  in  1907, 
a  total  service  of  twenty-eight  years.  I  do  not  know  of  any 
other  Senator  who  served  on  that  committee  for  so  long  a 
period.  When  the  Senate  was  in  control  of  the  Democrats 
under  the  second  Cleveland  Administration,  he  was  chairman 
of  the  committee. 

Senator  Morgan  was  an  extraordinary  man  in  many  re 
spects.  He  had  a  wonderful  fund  of  information  on  every 
subject,  but  was  not  a  man  of  very  sound  judgment,  and  I 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    349 

would  not  say  that  he  was  a  man  on  whose  advice  one  could 
rely  in  solving  a  difficult  problem.  At  the  same  time,  no  one 
could  doubt  his  honesty  and  sincerity  of  purpose.  He  did 
not  have  the  faculty  of  seeing  both  sides  of  a  question,  and 
once  he  made  up  his  mind,  it  was  impossible  to  change  him, 
or  by  argument  and  reason  to  move  him  from  a  position  delib 
erately  taken,  I  probably  had  as  intimate  an  acquaintance 
with  him  as  any  other  Senator  enjoyed,  for  we  not  only 
served  as  colleagues  on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 
but,  as  I  have  stated  in  another  chapter,  we  served  together 
on  the  Hawaiian  Commission.  He  was  one  of  the  most  de 
lightful  and  agreeable  of  men  if  you  agreed  with  him  on  any 
question,  but  he  was  so  intense  on  any  subject  in  which  he 
took  an  interest,  particularly  anything  pertaining  to  the 
interoceanic  canal,  that  he  became  almost  vicious  toward  any 
one  who  opposed  him. 

If  an  Isthmian  canal  be  finally  constructed,  Senator  Mor 
gan  must  be  accorded  a  large  share  of  the  credit;  and  his 
name  will  go  down  as  the  father  of  it,  even  though  he  him 
self  affirmed  in  debate  in  the  Senate  one  day,  after  the 
Panama  route  had  been  selected,  that  he  would  not  be 
"the  father  of  such  a  bastard."  Senator  Morgan  fought 
for  the  Nicaraguan  route  with  all  the  power  at  his  command. 
He  fought  the  treaties  with  Colombia  and  Panama,  first  for 
many  weeks  in  the  committee,  and  then  in  the  executive 
sessions  of  the  Senate.  He  wanted  to  arouse  public  senti 
ment  against  the  Panama  route,  and  he  addressed  the  Senate 
about  five  hours  every  day  for  thirteen  days  on  the  subject, 
desisting  only  when  we  consented  to  publish  his  speeches  and 
papers  on  the  subject,  nothwithstanding  they  had  been  made 
and  presented  in  executive  session.  Nevertheless,  it  was 
Senator  Morgan  who  for  very  many  years  kept  the  subject 
of  an  interoceanic  canal  before  Congress  and  the  country, 


350     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  finally,  partially  through  his  efforts,  interest  in  the  pro 
ject  was  kept  alive  until  it  was  determined,  first,  that  a 
canal  should  be  constructed;  and  second,  that  it  should  be 
over  the  Panama  route.  Many  people  thought  that  the 
selection  of  the  Panama  route  would  break  Senator  Mor 
gan's  heart ;  but  they  did  not  know  him.  He  made  the  best 
fight  he  could,  and  when  the  Panama  route  was  selected  he 
took  the  same  deep  interest  in  the  legislation  to  carry  the  work 
forward  that  he  had  always  taken  in  the  possible  alternative 
route.  He  was  firmly  convinced  that  the  canal,  on  account 
of  certain  physical  reasons,  could  never  be  constructed  across 
the  Isthmus  of  Panama. 

Time  alone  will  tell  whether  or  not  Senator  Morgan  was 
right.  Time  has  demonstrated  that  he  was  right  in  his  con 
tention  that  the  Panama  Canal  could  never  be  constructed 
for  the  amount  estimated  by  the  engineers,  one  hundred  and 
eighty-three  million  dollars.  It  has  already  cost  over  two 
hundred  million  dollars,  and  it  is  not  yet  nearly  completed. 
The  latest  estimates  are  that  it  will  cost  over  three  hundred 
and  eighty-five  million  dollars.  How  much  more  it  will  cost 
the  United  States,  no  one  can  say. 

During  the  later  years  of  his  life,  he  was  probably  the 
most  interesting  and  unique  figure  in  the  Senate.  Toward 
the  close  of  his  Senatorial  career  he  became  very  feeble,  but 
he  attended  to  his  Senatorial  duties  as  long  as  he  was  able 
to  be  about  at  all.  The  last  time  I  saw  him  alive  was  on  the 
fourth  of  March,  1907,  the  last  day  of  the  session,  and  the 
last  time  he  ever  entered  the  Senate  or  the  Capitol.  He 
looked  very  emaciated  and  feeble.  I  spoke  to  him,  inquir 
ing  about  his  health.  He  replied,  "I  am  just  tottering 
around,"  and  after  a  pause,  added,  "Cullom,  when  I  die 
and  you  die  and  Frye  dies,  and  one  or  two  others,  this  Senate 
will  not  amount  to  much,  will  it?" 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS     351 

He  died  a  few  months  afterwards  at  his  home  in  Wash 
ington,  and  in  his  death  there  passed  away  the  last  of  the  old 
familiar  type  of  Southern  statesmen,  so  frequently  to  be 
met  with  in  Washington  before  the  Civil  War,  and  the  last 
Senator  who  served  as  a  Brigadier-General  in  the  Confed 
erate  Army. 

Senator  Henry  Cabot  Lodge,  of  Massachusetts,  became 
a  member  of  the  committee  at  the  same  time  that  I  was 
placed  on  it;  but,  by  reason  of  my  longer  service  in  the 
Senate,  according  to  the  usual  custom,  I  outranked 
him. 

Senator  Lodge,  by  general  consent  I  believe,  is  regarded 
to-day  as  the  most  cultivated  man  in  the  Senate.  He  is  a 
scholar,  an  author,  and  a  noted  historian.  He  is  a  very  able 
man  in  any  position  in  which  he  is  placed.  Judged  by  the 
standard  of  his  great  predecessor  in  the  Senate  from  Massa 
chusetts,  Daniel  Webster,  he  is  not  an  orator,  but  he  is  a 
very  effective  speaker  and  a  good  debater.  He  is  one  of  the 
very  active  members  and  has  always  taken  a  prominent  part 
in  the  disposition  of  matters  coming  before  the  Upper  House. 
He  is  always  ready  to  work,  and  when  I  desire  any  matter  to 
be  disposed  of  without  delay,  I  refer  it  to  Senator  Lodge  as 
a  subcommittee,  with  confidence  that  it  will  be  attended  to 
quickly  and  correctly. 

He  is  a  strong,  active  Republican,  and  a  politician  (using 
that  term  in  its  higher  sense)  of  no  mean  order.  For  years 
in  Republican  National  Conventions  he  has  been  a  conspicu 
ous  figure;  and  twice  at  least  —  once  at  Philadelphia  in  1900, 
and  again  at  Chicago  in  1908  —  he  has  been  permanent 
chairman.  On  both  occasions  —  and  I  attended  both  con 
ventions  —  he  proved  himself  to  be  a  splendid  presiding  of 
ficer.  He  regards  his  position  as  the  senior  Senator  from 
Massachusetts,  the  successor  of  Webster  and  Sumner  and  a 


352     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

long  line  of  noted  men,  as  even  a  higher  honor  than  the 
Presidency  itself. 

I  have  seen  it  repeatedly  stated  that  Senator  Lodge  is  un 
popular  in  the  Senate, —  that  he  is  cold  and  formal.  From 
my  long  acquaintance  with  him,  extending  over  some  seven 
teen  years,  I  have  not  found  this  to  be  true.  In  times  of 
trouble  and  distress  in  my  own  life,  I  have  found  him  to  be 
warm  and  sympathetic. 

I  hope  that  he  will  remain  in  the  Senate  for  many  years 
to  come.  Should  he  retire,  his  loss  would  be  severely  felt 
both  as  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  and 
as  a  member  of  the  Senate. 

Senator  Augustus  O.  Bacon,  of  Georgia,  is  now  the  senior 
member  of  the  minority  on  the  committee;  and  should  the 
control  of  the  Senate  pass  into  the  hands  of  the  Democrats, 
he  will,  if  he  remain  in  the  Senate,  naturally  become  its  chair 
man.  He  is  an  able  lawyer,  and  if  subject  to  criticism  at 
all,  I  would  say  that  he  is  a  little  too  technical  as  a  jurist.  I 
do  not  say  this  to  disparage  him,  because  in  the  active  prac 
tice  of  his  profession  at  the  bar  this  would  be  regarded  to  his 
credit  rather  than  otherwise;  and  even  as  a  member  of  the 
Judiciary  Committee  of  the  Senate,  this  disposition  to 
magnify  technicalities  makes  him  one  of  the  most  valuable 
members  of  that  committee.  As  a  Senator,  he  is  jealous 
of  the  prerogatives  of  the  Senate,  and  vigorously  resists  the 
slightest  encroachment  on  the  part  of  the  Executive.  He 
is  one  of  the  effective  debaters  on  the  Democratic  side  of  the 
Senate,  and  seems  to  enjoy  a  controversy  for  its  own  sake. 
My  intercourse  with  Senator  Bacon  as  a  member  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  has  been  most  agreeable, 
and  I  have  come  to  like  and  respect  him  very  much.  In  my 
time,  he  has  been  an  exceptionally  active,  useful  member, 
and  he  has  often  told  me  that  he  prefers  his  place  as  a  member 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS     353 

of  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  to  any  other  committee- 
ship  in  the  Senate.  He  is  well  equipped,  by  education  and 
training,  for  the  work  of  the  committee,  and  gives  close  at 
tention  to  important  treaties  and  other  measures  coming  be 
fore  it.  He  stood  with  Senator  Morgan  in  opposing  the 
ratification  of  the  Panama  canal  treaty,  and  he  was  as  much 
in  earnest  in  his  opposition  to  it  as  was  Senator  Morgan ;  but 
unlike  the  Senator  from  Alabama,  he  did  not  attack  Sen 
ators  personally  who  differed  from  him.  When  technical 
matters  of  importance  came  before  the  committee  I  usually 
appointed  Senator  Spooner  and  Senator  Bacon  as  a  sub 
committee,  as  I  felt  that  anything  that  these  two  might  agree 
upon  would  be  right,  and  would  be  concurred  in  by  the  com 
mittee  and  by  the  Senate  as  well. 

Senator  Clarence  D.  Clark,  of  Wyoming,  was  a  member 
of  the  House  for  two  terms,  and  has  served  in  the  Senate  for 
about  fifteen  years.  In  point  of  service,  he  is  one  of  the 
oldest  of  the  Western  Senators.  Unlike  the  Eastern  States, 
very  few  of  the  Western  States  return  their  Senators  for 
term  after  term;  and  the  value  of  this,  as  a  matter  of  State 
pride,  is  well  demonstrated  in  the  case  of  Senator  Clark.  It 
has  enabled  him  to  reach  the  high  position  of  chairman  of  the 
Judiciary  Committee,  the  successor  of  a  long  line  of  able 
lawyers, —  Trumbull,  Edmunds,  Thurman,  Hoar,  and 
O.  H.  Platt  being  a  few  of  his  immediate  predecessors. 

Senator  Clark  has  been  a  member  of  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations  for  thirteen  years,  and  a  more  agreeable 
member  of  a  committee  it  would  be  difficult  to  find.  He  is 
a  capable  lawyer,  and  a  man  of  sound  common  sense.  I 
regret  that  his  arduous  duties  as  chairman  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee  do  not  permit  him  to  give  as  close  attention  to 
the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  as  I  would  like;  but  he 
always  attends  when  there  are  matters  of  particular  impor- 


354     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tance  before  it;  and  I  have  great  respect  for  his  judgment 
in  the  disposition  of  matters  in  which  he  takes  any  interest 
at  all. 

The  Hon.  Hernando  de  Soto  Money,  of  Mississippi,  has 
for  years  been  one  of  the  leading  Democratic  members  of 
Congress.  For  fourteen  years  he  was  a  member  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  a  prominent  member,  too,  and  he 
has  been  a  member  of  the  Senate  since  1897.  His  long  serv 
ice  in  the  House  at  once  enabled  him  to  take  his  place  as  a 
leader  of  his  party,  a  Senator  admired  and  respected  by  his 
colleagues  on  both  sides.  He  was  appointed  to  the  Foreign 
Relations  Committee  in  1899,  and  I  have  been  intimately  ac 
quainted  with  him  since. 

Senator  Money  is  a  highly  educated,  cultured  gentleman, 
and  has  travelled  extensively  over  the  world.  His  broad, 
liberal  education,  added  to  his  travel,  and  his  extensive  knowl 
edge  of  world  history,  made  him  an  especially  valuable 
member  of  the  committee  of  which  I  am  chairman.  During 
the  past  few  years  I  have  sympathized  with  him  very  greatly 
as  he  has  suffered  physical  pain  to  a  greater  degree  than  any 
other  man  whom  I  have  known,  and  yet  has  insisted  on  at 
tending  diligently  to  his  official  duties.  He  must  be  a  man 
of  extraordinary  will  power,  or  he  would  never  have  been 
able  to  conquer  his  physical  suffering  to  such  an  extent  as  to 
enable  him  to  attend  to  his  Senatorial  duties,  and  at  the  same 
time  to  obtain  the  fund  of  information  which  he  possesses,  as 
he  demonstrated  over  and  over  again  in  the  Senate. 

He  retired  voluntarily  from  the  Senate  on  the  fourth  of 
March,  1911. 

Of  the  many  Senators  with  whom  I  have  been  associated 
in  the  committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and  especially  since 
I  became  its  chairman,  there  are  two,  both  now  retired  to 
private  life,  in  whom  I  had  the  greatest  confidence  and  for 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    355 

whom  I  entertained  great  affection,  as  they  both  did  for 
me  —  these  Senators  were  the  Hon.  J.  B.  Foraker  of  Ohio, 
and  the  Hon.  John  C.  Spooner  of  Wisconsin. 

Senator  Foraker  preceded  Senator  Spooner  as  a  member 
of  this  committee  by  some  four  years.  I  do  not  know  how 
it  first  came  about,  but  I  became  very  intimate  with  Senator 
Foraker  almost  immediately  after  he  entered  the  Senate, 
and  at  once  grew  to  admire  him  exceedingly.  He  is  a  very 
brilliant  man,  and  has  had  a  notable  career.  He  enlisted  in 
the  Union  Army  as  a  private  when  sixteen  years  old,  and 
retired  at  the  close  of  the  war,  a  Captain.  He  then  com 
pleted  his  education,  and  entered  upon  the  practice  of  the 
law.  He  was  elected  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court  at  Cin 
cinnati,  and  later  became  a  candidate  for  Governor.  The 
occupant  of  many  civil  positions  of  importance  in  his  State,  a 
prominent  figure  in  national  convention  after  national  con 
vention,  nominating  Senator  Sherman  for  the  Presidency  in 
1884  and  1888,  and  placing  in  nomination  Mr.  McKinley  in 
1896,  Senator  Foraker  had  established  a  record  in  public 
life,  and  had  gathered  a  wealth  of  experience,  sufficient 
to  satisfy  the  ambitions  of  most  men,  before  his  great 
public  career  really  commenced  as  a  member  of  the  United 
States  Senate,  in  1897.  He  also  nominated  McKinley  in 
1900. 

Senator  Foraker  was  one  of  the  most  independent  men 
with  whom  I  ever  served  in  the  Senate.  He  was  a  man  of 
such  ability  and  unquestioned  courage  that  he  did  not  hesi 
tate  to  take  any  position  which  he  himself  deemed  to  be 
right,  regardless  of  the  views  of  others.  It  would  inure  to 
the  advantage  of  the  country  if  there  was  a  more  general 
disposition  among  public  men  to  adhere  to  their  own  con 
victions,  regardless  of  what  current  opinion  might  be.  Sen 
ator  Foraker  always  made  up  his  mind  on  public  questions 


356     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  clung  to  his  own  opinion  in  the  face  of  all  criticism. 
The  most  striking  instance  of  this  trait  was  when  he,  the 
only  Republican  Senator  to  do  so,  voted  against  the  Hep 
burn  Rate  Bill,  because  he  believed  it  to  be  unconstitutional. 
The  very  fact  that  he  stood  alone  in  his  opposition  to  that  bill 
did  not  seem  to  bother  him  in  the  least. 

On  the  recommendation  of  President  Roosevelt,  the  Com 
mittee  on  Immigration  of  the  Senate  attempted  to  pass  a 
very  drastic  Chinese  exclusion  law.  I  examined  the  bill  and 
became  convinced  at  once  that  it  was  absolutely  contrary  to 
and  in  violation  of  our  treaties  with  China.  I  was  very 
much  surprised  at  the  time  that  even  Senator  Lodge,  one  of 
the  most  conservative  of  Senators,  supported  the  bill.  I  was 
deluged  with  telegrams  from  labor  organizations,  as  I  know 
Senator  Foraker  was,  favoring  the  passage  of  the  bill;  but 
he,  with  Senator  Platt  of  Connecticut,  and  some  others  in 
the  Senate,  whom  I  assisted  as  best  I  could,  led  the  opposi 
tion  to  the  bill  reported  by  the  Committee  on  Immigration 
and  defeated  it.  Senator  Foraker  very  well  knew  that  his 
opposition  to  this  bill  would  not  strengthen  him  at  home,  but 
he  disregarded  that  fact  and  opposed  it  because  he  believed 
it  was  contrary  to  our  treaty  obligations. 

A  more  recent  case  in  which  he  showed  his  independence 
was  his  taking  up  the  fight  of  the  troops  dismissed  on  ac 
count  of  the  so-called  Brownsville  affair.  This  was  very 
unselfish  on  the  part  of  Senator  Foraker.  He  had  nothing 
to  gain  by  espousing  the  cause  of  a  few  negroes,  but  much  to 
lose  by  antagonizing  the  National  administration.  He  did 
not  hesitate  a  moment,  however.  There  is  no  question  that 
President  Roosevelt  acted  hastily  in  dismissing  the  entire 
company;  but  this  was  one  occasion  when  President  Roose 
velt  would  not  recede  even  though  it  became  perfectly  clear 
to  almost  every  one  in  Congress  that  he  was  wrong. 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    357 

Senator  Foraker  always  did  make  it  a  point  to  attend  the 
meetings  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  but  for 
some  reason  or  other  he  was  never  punctual  and  was  seldom 
in  attendance  when  the  committee  was  called  to  order.  But 
at  the  same  time  he  was  prepared  on  all  important  ques 
tions  coming  before  the  committee.  He  seemed  to  me  to 
have  given  attention  beforehand  to  subjects  which  he  knew 
would  come  before  a  particular  meeting,  and  his  opinion  on 
any  treaty  or  bill  before  the  committee  was  always  sought  by 
his  colleagues  and  listened  to  with  respect,  and  almost  with 
out  exception  his  opinion  prevailed. 

I  regretted  exceedingly  to  see  him  retire  from  the  Senate. 
From  the  time  he  entered  that  body,  he  was  consistently  one  of 
the  principal  defenders  of  Republican  policies  and  Republi 
can  administrations  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate. 

Senator  John  C.  Spooner,  of  Wisconsin,  was,  in  my  judg 
ment,  one  of  the  best  lawyers  who  ever  served  as  a  member 
of  the  Senate,  and  among  its  membership  we  find  the  names 
of  the  greatest  lawyers  and  judges  of  America.  He  had 
served  in  the  Civil  War,  having  retired  at  its  close  with  the 
brevet  of  Major.  He  early  took  up  the  law  as  a  career,  and 
never  abandoned  it,  even  when  elected  to  the  Senate;  and  as 
I  write  this,  I  believe  he  is  regarded  as  one  of  the  foremost 
lawyers  of  New  York. 

He  came  into  the  Senate  two  years  after  I  entered  that 
body,  and  I  remember  him  there  as  opposing  the  conference 
report  on  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act.  His  State  hav 
ing  passed  into  the  control  of  the  Democrats,  he  retired 
from  the  Senate  in  1891,  but  was  reflected  in  1897.  He 
declined  several  tenders  of  cabinet  positions,  preferring  to 
remain  independent  as  a  Senator. 

I  knew  him  for  a  good  many  years.  Representing  a 
neighboring  State,  as  he  did  in  the  Senate,  I  became  very 


358     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

intimate  with  him,  and  never  had  the  slightest  hesitancy  in 
seeking  his  advice  when  I  was  in  doubt  concerning  any  legal 
or  constitutional  question. 

Senator  Spooner  was  a  much  more  technical  lawyer  than 
Senator  Foraker,  but  not  quite  so  technical  as  Senator  Bacon. 
On  questions  coming  before  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Re 
lations,  his  advice  was  always  to  be  trusted.  My  judg 
ment  in  this  respect  may  be  influenced  by  our  close  personal 
friendship ;  but  I  always  felt  that  when  I  had  his  support  on 
any  question  I  was  safe  and  right  in  the  position  I  took 
respecting  it.  Seldom  within  my  knowledge  did  the  Sen 
ate  fail  to  agree  with  any  attitude  that  Senator  Spooner  as 
sumed  on  a  controverted  question. 

Senator  Spooner  was  placed  on  the  committee  at  the  time 
I  became  its  chairman.  At  that  time  there  were  before  the 
committee  treaties,  legislation,  and  matters  of  the  utmost 
importance.  He  entered  upon  the  work  with  the  greatest 
interest,  and  exercised  commanding  influence  in  the  disposi 
tion  of  matters  under  consideration.  He  always  seemed  to 
take  particular  interest  in  my  success  as  chairman  of  the 
committee,  and  always  wanted  to  assist  and  help  me  wherever 
he  could. 

We  were  wrestling  with  the  Reciprocity  treaty  with  Cuba 
at  a  meeting.  It  had  been  before  the  committee  for  a  num 
ber  of  meetings;  Senator  Spooner  feared  that  I  was  about  to 
turn  the  treaty  over  to  another  Senator  to  report,  and  he  sent 
me,  while  the  committee  was  in  session,  a  brief  note  marked 
"Confidential."  It  read: 

"The  report  is  that  you  will  give  this  treaty  to  another  to  report.  I 
think  you  should  report  it  yourself,  as  you  are  not  only  chairman  of 
the  committee,  but  you  are  also  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Relations 
with  Cuba.  Platt  spoke  to  me  about  it.  He  felt  sensitive  in  the  first 
place  because  the  treaty  did  not  go  to  his  committee.  The  fact  that 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    359 

you  and  others  on  this  committee  were  on  his  committee  reconciled  him. 
I  will  stand  to  your  shoulder  in  the  fight  for  its  ratification. 

"Yours, 

"SPOONER." 

I  hope  Senator  Spooner,  if  he  does  me  the  honor  of  glanc 
ing  through  these  rambling  recollections,  will  forgive  my 
quoting  this  confidential  note  without  his  consent;  but  I  do 
so  only  to  show  the  very  friendly  and  confidential  relation 
ship  that  existed  between  us. 

I  doubt  very  much  whether  the  Colombia  or  Panama  treaty 
would  have  been  ratified,  or  the  Panama  route  selected  in 
preference  to  the  Nicaraguan  route  for  the  Isthmian  canal, 
despite  the  great  influence  of  Senator  Hanna,  had  not  Sen 
ator  Spooner  joined  in  advocating  the  Panama  route. 

It  was  a  long  and  difficult  struggle,  not  only  before  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  but  before  the  Committee 
on  Interoceanic  Canals,  and  resulted  in  the  retirement  of 
Senator  Morgan  as  chairman  of  the  last-mentioned  com 
mittee  —  a  position  he  had  held  for  many  years  —  and  in 
the  selection  of  Senator  Hanna  to  succeed  him.  But  Sen 
ator  Spooner,  through  his  technical  knowledge,  dominated 
the  Committee  on  Interoceanic  Canals,  and  succeeded  finally 
in  the  passage  of  the  Spooner  act  which  designated  Panama, 
if  that  route  could  be  purchased,  as  the  route  for  the  canal. 

Senator  Spooner  was  one  of  the  real  leaders  of  the  Senate 
from  1897  until  he  retired.  He  was  one  of  the  most  eloquent 
men  who  served  in  the  Senate  during  that  period.  During 
all  the  debates  on  the  Cuban  question,  the  important  results 
growing  out  of  the  Spanish- American  War,  the  question  of 
Imperialism  —  his  participation  in  all  these  momentous  sub 
jects  was  above  criticism.  I  have  heard  him  in  the  Senate, 
speaking  day  after  day.  He  never  grew  tiresome ;  never  re 
peated  himself;  always  held  the  most  profound  attention  of 


360     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

the  Senate;  and  his  closing  words  were  listened  to  with  the 
same  attention  and  with  the  same  interest,  by  his  colleagues 
and  by  the  galleries,  as  marked  the  beginning  of  any  of  his 
speeches.  After  his  conclusions  his  Republican  colleagues 
invariably  gathered  around  him,  offering  their  congratula 
tions. 

Senator  Spooner  and  Senator  Foraker  have  both  retired. 
It  was  thought  at  the  time  that  their  places  could  not  be  filled, 
and  I,  as  one  of  the  older  Senators  who  remember  them  well, 
can  not  believe  that  their  places  have  been  filled.  Of  all  the 
Senators  with  whom  I  have  served,  Spooner  and  Foraker 
were  most  alike  in  their  combative  natures,  in  their  willing 
ness  to  take  the  responsibility  to  go  to  the  front  to  lead  the 
fight.  Senators  come  and  go,  the  personnel  of  the  Senate 
changes,  one  Senator  will  be  replaced  by  another,  but  the 
Senate  itself  will  go  on  as  long  as  the  Republic  endures. 

One  of  the  most  dignified,  honest,  straightforward,  capable 
men  with  whom  I  have  served,  was  the  Hon.  Charles  W. 
Fairbanks,  of  Indiana.  He  was  a  devoted  adherent,  friend, 
and  follower  of  the  late  President  McKinley,  and  had  been 
his  friend  long  before  he  was  nominated  for  President  in 
1896.  Senator  Fairbanks  took  a  very  prominent  part  in 
that  convention,  was  its  temporary  chairman,  and  in  1900  was 
chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  of  the  National 
Convention  which  met  at  Philadelphia.  He  entered  the  Sen 
ate  in  1897,  and  during  the  following  year  was  appointed  by 
President  McKinley  a  member  of  the  United  States  and 
British  Joint  High  Commission  for  the  adjustment  of  all 
outstanding  questions  concerning  the  United  States  and 
Canada.  The  commission  was  an  exceedingly  important 
one,  but  failing  to  agree  on  the  Alaskan  boundary,  it  was 
compelled  to  adjourn  without  settling  any  of  the  questions 
before  it.  Its  labors  were  not  wasted,  however,  as  it  fur- 


JOHN   C.  SPOONER 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS     361 

nished  the  nucleus  for  the  final  adjustment  of  those  questions 
under  the  administration  of  Mr.  Root,  in  the  State  Depart 
ment. 

Senator  Fairbanks  was  a  close  personal  friend  of  Presi 
dent  McKinley,  and  almost  immediately  assumed  quite  an 
important  position  in  the  Senate.  He  was  appointed  to  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  of  which  he  was  quite  an 
able  and  influential  member,  as  he  was  of  every  committee  of 
the  Senate  on  which  he  served.  He  accepted  the  nomination 
of  the  Republican  Convention  of  1904  for  Vice-President. 
I  considered  that  his  proper  place  was  in  the  Senate;  but 
for  some  reason  or  other  he  gave  it  out  that  he  would  not 
decline  the  nomination  for  the  office  of  Vice-President,  and 
neither  would  he  seek  it.  The  Convention  very  wisely  de 
termined  that  he  was  the  best  candidate  that  could  be  nom 
inated.  The  duties  of  the  Vice-President  are  not  very  ardu 
ous;  but  in  all  my  service  in  the  Senate  I  do  not  know  of  a 
Vice-President  who  so  strictly  observed  the  obligation  ad 
herent  to  the  office  as  did  Mr.  Fairbanks.  He  was  a  can 
didate  for  President  in  1908  but  was  defeated  by  President 
Taft. 

Since  his  retirement  from  the  Vice-Presidency,  he  has  at 
least  twice  been  tendered  high  appointments  in  the  diplomatic 
service,  first  as  Ambassador  to  the  Court  of  St.  James,  and, 
later  (it  having  been  rumored  while  he  was  travelling  in 
China  that  he  had  expressed  himself  as  favorably  inclined 
toward  the  acceptance  of  the  position  of  minister  to  that 
country),  Secretary  Knox  indicated  a  desire  through  mu 
tual  friends  to  have  him  appointed.  Mr.  Fairbanks  thanked 
his  friends,  but  declined  the  appointment. 

In  his  tour  around  the  world  after  retiring  from  the  office 
of  Vice-President,  he  conducted  himself  with  great  dignity 
and  propriety. 


862     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Senator  Albert  J.  Beveridge  succeeded  Senator  Fair 
banks,  as  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 
For  years  Senator  Beveridge  had  seemed  more  than  anxious 
to  become  a  member  of  this  committee.  When  he  first  en 
tered  the  Senate  he  thought  he  should  have  been  made  one 
of  its  members,  as  he  had  always  taken  a  deep  interest  in 
foreign  matters;  but  the  Committee  on  Organization  deter 
mined  that  his  colleague,  Senator  Fairbanks,  was  entitled 
to  the  preference.  When  Senator  Fairbanks  retired,  I  re 
quested  the  Committee  on  Organization  to  place  Senator 
Beveridge  on  my  committee,  which  it  did. 

I  have  always  admired  Senator  Beveridge.  He  is  an  ex 
ceptionally  engaging  speaker,  a  brilliant  man,  and  so  talented 
that  one  cannot  help  being  attracted  to  him.  I  had  heard 
of  him  years  before  he  entered  the  Senate.  The  late  Senator 
MacDonald  of  Indiana,  a  strong,  gifted  lawyer  and  the 
highest  type  of  man,  told  me  one  day  that  he  had  a  young 
man  in  his  office,  named  Beveridge,  who  knew  more  about 
the  politics  of  the  day  than  almost  any  other  man  in  the 
State,  and  he  believed  he  would  be  a  controlling  factor  in 
Republican  politics  in  Indiana. 

Senator  Beveridge  is  a  popular  magazine  writer,  as  he  is 
one  of  the  most  popular  public  speakers  of  to-day.  As  a 
campaign  orator,  his  services  are  constantly  in  demand. 

I  regret  very  much  to  say,  that  notwithstanding  Senator 
Beveridge's  prior  anxiety  to  become  a  member  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  after  his  appointment  he 
attended  very  few  meetings  and  apparently  took  little 
interest  in  its  business.  His  duties  as  Chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Territories,  combined  with  work  on  other  com 
mittees,  necessarily  consumed  most  of  his  time. 

For  a  number  of  years  after  the  Hon.  John  Kean,  of  New 
Jersey,  entered  the  Senate,  I  had  no  special  acquaintance 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS     363 

with  him,  and  I  did  not  welcome  him  particularly  when  he 
was  made  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 
in  1901.  Since  then  I  have  become  very  intimate  with  Sen 
ator  Kean,  and  there  have  been  few  men  on  the  committee 
for  whom  I  entertained  a  higher  regard,  or  in  whom  I  placed 
more  confidence.  He  was  a  very  industrious  and  useful 
member,  as  he  is  in  the  Senate.  He  filled  quite  a  prominent 
place  in  the  Senate,  and  watched  legislation  probably  more 
closely  than  any  other  member.  He  was  always  familiar 
with  the  bills  on  the  calendar,  and  made  it  a  point  to  object 
to  any  questionable  measures  that  came  before  the  Senate. 
He  advanced  in  influence  and  power  very  rapidly  in  the 
last  few  years  of  his  service.  Through  Senator  Kean,  I 
have  been  enabled  very  often  to  expedite  the  passage  of 
measures,  not  only  coming  from  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,  but  bills  in  which  I  have  been  interested  pertain 
ing  to  the  affairs  of  my  own  State.  If  the  Senate  had  what 
is  known  as  a  "whip,"  I  would  say  that  Senator  Kean  comes 
more  nearly  being  the  Republican  "whip"  than  any  other 
Senator,  with  the  possible  exception,  in  recent  years,  of  Sena 
tor  Murray  Crane,  of  Massachusetts. 

Senator  Thomas  H.  Carter,  of  Montana,  a  member  of 
the  committee  in  the  Sixty-first  Congress,  was  one  of  the 
most  popular  members  of  the  Senate.  His  ability  as  a 
lawyer  and  legislator,  combined  with  his  wit  and  keen  sense 
of  humor,  enabled  him  to  assume  quite  a  commanding 
position  in  that  body.  When  feeling  ran  high  in  debate, 
sometimes  almost  to  the  extent  of  personal  encounter,  Sena 
tor  Carter  would  appear,  and  by  a  few  well-chosen  words, 
voiced  in  his  calm,  quiet  manner,  throw  oil  upon  the  troubled 
waters,  and  peace  again  reigned  supreme. 

I  have  known  Senator  Carter  for  very  many  years.  I 
knew  him  as  a  young  man.  His  home  was  at  one  time  in 


364     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Illinois,  at  the  little  town  of  Pana,  about  twenty-five  miles 
from  my  own  home  in  Springfield.  He  has  held  many  pub 
lic  offices.  Delegate  from  the  Territory  of  Montana,  mem 
ber  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  Commissioner  of  the  General 
Land  Office,  Senator  from  1895  to  1901  and  from  1905  to 
1906,  Chairman  of  the  Republican  National  Committee  in 
1892,  he  has  in  all  these  positions  distinguished  himself  as  a 
man  of  a  high  order  of  ability.  I  have  always  liked  Senator 
Carter  very  much,  and  I  was  glad  indeed  that  he  was  named 
a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  He  is  a 
very  useful  and  influential  member,  as  he  is  of  the  Senate. 

Senator  William  Alden  Smith,  of  Michigan,  was  only 
recently  placed  on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 
quite  a  distinction  for  a  Senator  who  had  served  for  so  brief 
a  time  as  a  member  of  the  Senate.  Senator  Smith,  how 
ever,  was  a  prominent  member  of  the  House  for  many  years, 
and  was  elected  to  the  Senate  while  serving  as  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Representatives.  He  has  taken  position  in  the 
Senate  very  rapidly.  He  is  a  lawyer  of  experience  and  long 
practice,  and  an  industrious  and  competent  legislator.  He  is 
always  watchful  of  the  interests  of  his  State.  He  took  a 
prominent  part  in  the  consideration  of  the  treaties  between 
the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  concerning  Canada, 
more  especially  the  boundary  and  water-way  treaties.  It  was 
through  his  efforts  that  an  amendment  to  the  latter  treaty 
was  adopted,  which  he  considered  necessary  to  protect  the 
interests  of  his  State,  and  which  I  greatly  feared  would  re 
sult  in  the  rejection  of  the  treaty  by  the  Canadian  Parlia 
ment.  I  am  very  glad  to  say,  however,  that  the  treaty  has 
been  ratified  by  both  Governments,  and  only  recently  pro 
claimed. 

Senator  Smith  has  taken  a  keen  interest  in  matters  before 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and  with  his  experience, 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS     365 

industry,  and  capacity,  he  is  bound  to  become  a  very  useful 
member  of  the  committee. 

One  of  the  last  members  to  be  appointed  on  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations  was  the  Hon.  Elihu  Root,  of 
New  York.  He  is  one  of  the  greatest  men  and  ablest  Sen 
ators  who  have  ever  been  members  of  the  committee.  When 
he  became  a  member  of  it,  he  was  not  at  all  a  stranger,  for 
the  reason  that  he,  on  my  invitation,  had,  while  Secretary  of 
State,  for  two  years  previous  to  his  retirement  from  that  of 
fice,  attended  almost  every  meeting  of  the  committee.  Be 
tween  Mr.  Hay  and  the  members  of  the  Senate,  there  was 
not  the  close  relationship  which  should  have  existed  between 
that  body  and  the  State  Department. 

Secretary  Hay  was  not  disposed  to  cultivate  friendly  rela 
tions  with  Senators,  and  certain  remarks  he  made  concerning 
the  Senate  as  a  body  were  very  distasteful  to  Senators;  and 
although  I  had  invited  him,  he  seemed  very  averse  to  coming 
before  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  I  did  not  press 
the  point.  The  result  was  that  important  treaties  and  other 
matters  were  constantly  sent  in,  with  which  the  members  of 
the  committee  were  not  familiar,  and  we  had  to  grope  in  the 
dark,  as  it  were,  and  inform  ourselves  concerning  them  as 
best  we  could. 

But  when  Mr.  Root  became  Secretary  of  State,  I  resolved 
to  insist  that  the  Secretary  meet  with  us  from  time  to  time, 
and  explain  such  treaties  and  measures  as  might  need  ex 
planation,  and  upon  which  the  Administration  was  anxious 
to  secure  favorable  action.  In  other  words,  there  should  be 
closer  relationship  between  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions  and  the  State  Department  than  had  formerly  existed. 
I  first  saw  President  Roosevelt  and  told  him  that  I  hoped 
Mr.  Root  would  come  before  the  committee  as  occasion 
might  require.  The  President  seemed  at  once  impressed 


366     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

with  the  propriety  of  the  proposed  plan,  and  remarked  in  his 
own  characteristic  fashion:  "That  is  just  the  thing."  I 
then  saw  Mr.  Root,  whom  I  knew  very  well  as  Secretary  of 
War,  and  he  was  more  than  pleased  with  the  suggestion,  as 
serting  that  it  was  just  what  he  wanted  to  do.  It  so  hap 
pened  that  during  his  administration  of  the  State  Depart 
ment  he  found  it  necessary  to  negotiate  more  treaties,  and 
treaties  of  greater  importance,  than  any  of  his  more  recent 
predecessors  in  that  high  office,  and  he  became  so  constant 
and  punctual  in  his  attendance  at  the  meetings  of  the  com 
mittee  that  we  grew  almost  to  regard  him  as  a  regular  mem 
ber,  even  before  he  entered  the  Senate. 

He  has  served  on  the  committee  but  two  sessions,  but  even 
in  that  short  time  he  has  proved  his  fitness  to  fill  the  gap  left 
by  the  retirement  of  Senators  Spooner  and  Foraker.  As  a 
lawyer  he  is  as  brilliant  as  either  of  those  men,  and  probably, 
owing  to  his  executive  experience,  a  more  efficient  statesman. 
I  regard  him  as  the  best  qualified  man  in  this  country  for 
any  position  in  the  public  service  which  he  would  accept. 
He  would  make  a  strong  President,  and  as  a  Senator  he  is 
equipped  with  extraordinary  qualifications.  If  he  remains 
in  the  Senate,  by  sheer  force  of  ability  alone  he  is  bound  to 
become  its  acknowledged  leader.  We  have  never  had  a 
stronger  Secretary  of  State.  Mr.  Hay  was  a  very  great  man 
in  many  respects,  and  could  handle  an  international  question, 
especially  pertaining  to  the  Far  East,  with  more  skill  than 
any  of  his  predecessors ;  but  Mr.  Root,  while  probably  not  so 
well  versed  in  diplomacy  as  Mr.  Hay,  is  one  of  the  foremost 
lawyers  in  America,  and  has  the  faculty  of  going  into  the 
minutest  details  of  every  question,  large  or  small,  even  to  the 
extent  of  reorganizing  all  the  multitude  of  details  of  the  State 
Department.  He  was  the  real  head  of  the  department,  and 
supervised  every  matter  coming  before  it. 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS    367 

As  Secretary  of  State  he  made  it  one  of  his  policies  to  bring 
the  republics  of  this  hemisphere  into  closer  relationship  with 
one  another.  He  visited  South  and  Central  America,  and 
did  much  to  bring  about  a  friendly  feeling  with  the  republics 
of  those  regions. 

He  is  one  of  those  who  insisted  upon  the  absolute  equality 
of  nations,  both  great  and  small ;  and  in  this  he  was  particu 
larly  pointed  in  his  instructions  to  the  delegates  represent 
ing  the  United  States  at  the  Second  Peace  Conference  at 
The  Hague. 

He  did  not  retire  from  the  State  Department  until  he  had 
adjusted  almost,  if  not  all,  outstanding  questions  between 
the  United  States  and  other  Nations.  He  closed  up  the 
work  of  the  Joint  High  Commission,  and  by  a  series  of 
treaties  adjusted  every  factor  of  difference  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain  concerning  Canada. 

Bringing  the  consideration  of  the  personnel  of  the  com 
mittee  up  to  the  close  of  the  Sixty-first  Congress,  there  re 
main  to  be  mentioned  only  William  J.  Stone,  of  Mis 
souri,  and  Benjamin  F.  Shively,  of  Indiana,  both  Democrats. 
Mr.  Stone  and  Mr.  Shively  are  not  only  new  men  on  the 
committee,  but  both  of  them  are  comparatively  new  to  the 
Senate.  They  had,  however,  been  sufficiently  tried  in  other 
fields  of  effort  to  justify  their  States  in  sending  them  to  this 
exalted  body,  and  the  records  both  have  made  here  have 
well  vindicated  their  selection.  In  a  comparatively  brief 
time  they  have  attained  to  positions  of  leadership  on  the 
Democratic  side  of  the  chamber,  and  since  they  have  become 
members  of  this  committee  they  have  manifested  an  unusual 
grasp  of  international  subjects.  They  are  from  States 
which  adjoin  my  own  State  of  Illinois,  and  I  am  especially 
pleased  to  have  them  as  members  of  the  committee  of  which 
I  am  chairman. 


CHAPTER  XXIV 

WORK   OF   THE   COMMITTEE   ON    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

WHEN  I  became  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations,  in  1901,  I  found  a  large  quantity  of 
undisposed  of  matter  on  the  dockets,  both  legislative  and 
executive.  I  determined  that  I  would  at  once  proceed  to 
clear  the  docket  and  endeavor  to  make  the  committee  an 
active  working  one.  I  have  since  made  it  a  policy,  as  best  I 
could,  to  secure  some  action,  favorable  or  unfavorable,  on 
every  matter  referred  to  the  committee  by  the  Senate. 

The  first  subject  to  which  I  turned  my  attention  was  the 
reciprocity  treaties  between  the  United  States  and  Barbados, 
Bermuda,  British  Guiana,  Turk  Islands  and  Caicos,  Jamai 
ca,  Argentine  Republic,  France,  Dominican  Republic,  Ecua 
dor,  and  Denmark. 

These  treaties  had  been  pending  before  the  committee  for 
two  years,  and  I  resolved  as  I  expressed  it  to  one  Senator 
who  was  opposed  to  them,  that  I  would  get  them  out  of  the 
committee  "if  I  had  to  carry  them  out  in  a  basket."  These 
treaties  were  negotiated  under  the  authority  contained  in 
the  fourth  section  of  the  Dingley  Act,  which  provided : 

"Section  4.  That  whenever  the  President  of  the  United  States,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  with  a  view  to  secure  reciprocal 
trade  with  foreign  countries,  shall,  within  a  period  of  two  years  from 
and  after  the  passage  of  this  act,  enter  into  commercial  treaty  or  treaties 
with  any  other  country  concerning  the  admission  to  such  country  of  goods, 
wares,  or  merchandise  of  the  United  States  .  .  .  and  in  such  treaty 
or  treaties  shall  provide  for  reduction  during  a  specified  period  of  the 

368 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  369 

duties  imposed  by  this  act,  to  the  extent  of  twenty  per  centum  thereof 
upon  such  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  as  may  be  designated  therein, 
.  .  .  or  shall  provide  for  the  transfer  during  such  period  from  the 
dutiable  list  of  this  act  to  the  free  list  thereof  of  such  goods,  wares,  or 
merchandise  the  product  of  foreign  countries;  and  when  .  .  .  any 
such  treaty  shall  have  been  duly  ratified  by  the  Senate  and  approved  by 
Congress,  then  and  thereafter  the  duties  which  shall  be  collected  by  the 
United  States  upon  any  of  the  designated  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise 
from  the  foreign  country  with  which  such  treaty  has  been  made,  shall, 
during  the  period  provided  for,  be  the  duties  specified  and  provided  in 
such  treaty,  and  none  other.*' 

There  was  considerable  opposition  to  the  ratification  of 
these  treaties  in  the  Senate,  and  very  strong  opposition  to 
them  in  the  committee.  President  McKinley  was  very  much 
in  favor  of  their  ratification,  and  as  one  treaty  after  another 
expired,  a  new  one  would  be  made  reviving  it. 

The  first  problem  which  confronted  me  was  this:  The 
fourth  section  of  the  Dingley  Act  provided  that  such  treaties 
should  be  made  only  within  two  years  after  the  passage  of 
the  act;  the  two  years  had  long  since  expired  —  could  the 
Senate  ratify  them  at  all? 

I  submitted  to  the  Senate  a  report  on  the  constitutional 
question.  The  single  question  covered  was,  whether  the 
treaties  not  having  been  ratified  by  the  Senate  within  the 
two  years  specified  in  the  Dingley  Act  were  still  within  its 
jurisdiction. 

The  committee  determined  that  the  President  and  the 
Senate  are,  under  the  Constitution,  the  treaty-making  power. 
The  initiative  lies  with  the  President.  He  can  negotiate  such 
treaties  as  may  seem  to  him  wise,  and  propose  them  to  the 
Senate  for  the  advice  and  consent  of  that  body.  The  power 
of  the  President  and  the  Senate  is  derived  from  the  Con 
stitution.  There  is  under  our  Constitution  no  other  source 
of  treaty-making  power.  The  Congress  is  without  power  to 


370     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

grant  to  the  President  or  to  the  Senate  any  authority  with 
respect  to  treaties ;  nor  does  the  Congress  possess  any  power 
to  fetter  or  limit  in  any  way  the  President  or  the  Senate  in 
the  exercise  of  this  constitutional  function.  It  cannot  in 
any  way  enlarge,  limit,  or  attach  conditions  to  the  treaty- 
making  power,  and  the  subcommittee  concluded  their  report 
on  this  branch  of  the  subject  with  this  statement: 

"The  committee  is  clearly  of  the  opinion  that  nothing  contained  in  sec 
tion  four  of  the  Dingley  Act  constitutes  any  valid  restriction  upon  the 
jurisdiction  and  power  of  the  Senate  to  act  upon  the  commercial  treaties 
now  pending." 

That  question  being  disposed  of  to  my  satisfaction,  I  pro 
ceeded  to  urge  the  consideration  of  the  treaties  at  every  meet 
ing  of  the  committee  for  many  months,  but  it  was  not  until 
June,  1902,  that  I  secured  the  favorable  report  of  all  the 
treaties,  excepting  the  treaty  with  the  Argentine  Republic 
and  that  with  Jamaica. 

There  was  another  very  serious  question  which  I  raised 
myself,  and  that  was,  whether  legislation  was  necessary  to 
carry  them  into  effect,  or  whether  the  treaties  were  self -ex 
ecuting.  None  of  the  treaties  contained  any  provision  for 
legislation,  and  by  their  terms,  they  would  go  into  effect 
without  legislation.  John  A.  Kasson,  who  negotiated  them, 
told  me  that  he  purposely  left  out  any  reference  to  legislative 
action,  because  the  executive  department  had  serious 
doubts  on  the  subject,  and  preferred  to  permit  the  Senate 
itself  to  pass  upon  it. 

I  have  always  contended  that  reciprocity  treaties,  like  other 
treaties  in  general,  are  self-executing,  if  by  their  terms  they 
do  not  provide  for  legislative  action. 

I  made  a  very  extended  address  in  the  Senate  on  January 
29,  1902,  because  I  wanted  to  get  the  attention  of  the  Senate 
to  this  important  constitutional  subject.  I  said  in  opening: 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  371 

"Has  Congress  any  power  or  authority,  under  the  Constitution,  over 
treaties?  This  subject  has  been  discussed  at  different  times  during  our 
entire  Constitutional  history.  It  is  a  very  complicated  question,  not  only 
because  the  authority  of  the  House  on  the  subject  of  treaties  has  been 
disputed  and  argued  almost  from  the  very  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  but 
the  fourth  section  of  the  Dingley  Act  specifically  provides  how  and  when 
such  treaties  shall  be  made.  .  .  .  In  my  opinion  the  fourth  section 
of  the  Dingley  Act,  so  far  as  it  attempts  to  confer,  limit,  or  define 
the  treaty-making  power  is  not  only  an  unwarranted  interference  with 
the  powers  of  the  President  and  Senate,  but  is  unconstitutional,  because 
it  comes  in  conflict  with  that  clause  of  the  Constitution  which  says  that 
the  President  shall  have  power,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  Senate  to  make  treaties.  No  law  of  Congress  can  in  any  way  modify 
or  limit  those  powers.  The  Dingley  Law  can  not  limit  the  time  in  which 
we  shall  be  allowed  to  make  a  treaty;  it  can  not  give  to  Congress  any 
power  on  the  subject  of  treaties  not  given  it  by  the  Constitution,  and 
under  the  Constitution  Congress  as  a  legislative  body  is  not  a  part  of 
the  treaty-making  power." 

I  contended  that  the  fourth  section  of  the  Dingley  Act,  if 
considered  by  the  Executive  at  all,  should  be  merely  as  an 
expression  of  the  views  of  Congress  in  the  adjustment  of  the 
specific  terms  of  each  treaty. 

But  the  particular  question  in  which  I  was  more  inter 
ested  and  to  which  I  devoted  most  of  my  remarks  was, 
whether  a  reciprocity  treaty,  which  by  its  terms  provides 
that  the  duties  to  be  collected  after  its  ratification  shall  be 
those  specified  in  the  treaty,  and  none  other  (and  which 
makes  no  reference  to  further  Congressional  action),  would 
of  its  own  force  operate  to  repeal  so  much  of  the  tariff  act  as 
may  come  in  conflict  with  it,  or  whether  it  would  be  necessary 
for  Congress  to  act  on  a  treaty  before  those  duties  are  re 
duced,  and  before  the  treaty  shall  become  the  supreme  law 
of  the  land. 

I  then  proceeded  to  a  minute  examination  into  the  his 
tory  of  the  treaty -making  provision  in  the  Constitution,  trac- 


372     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

ing  it  through  the  Constitutional  Convention,  and  giving  the 
views  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  as  to  its  scope  and 
effect.  It  was  Alexander  Hamilton  who  drafted  the  treaty- 
making  clause  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  and  it  was  pur 
posely  so  framed  as  to  exclude  the  House  from  all  considera 
tion  of  treaties.  Twice  it  was  proposed  in  the  Constitutional 
Convention  to  unite  the  House  of  Representatives  with  the 
Senate  in  the  approval  of  treaties,  but  both  times  it  was  re 
jected  almost  unanimously,  Pennsylvania  alone  voting  in 
the  affirmative.  The  treaty-making  clause  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  was  adopted  in  the  Constitutional  Convention 
only  after  a  most  vigorous  fight  against  it  by  those  who  con 
tended  that  the  authority  conferred  was  too  great.  Patrick 
Henry  thought  that,  "If  the  clause  were  adopted  as  it  was 
submitted  to  the  State,  two-thirds  of  a  quorum  of  the  Senate 
would  be  empowered  to  make  treaties  that  might  relinquish 
and  alienate  territorial  rights  and  our  most  valuable  com 
mercial  advantages.  In  short,  should  anything  be  left,  it 
would  be  because  the  President  and  Senators  would  be 
pleased  to  admit  it.  The  power  of  making  treaties  under 
the  Constitution  extends  farther  than  in  any  country  in  the 
world.  Treaties  have  more  force  here  than  in  any  part  of 
Christendom."  And  he  begged  the  convention  to  stop  be 
fore  it  conceded  this  power  unguarded  and  unaltered. 

The  power  was  conferred  on  the  President  and  the  Sen 
ate,  unguarded  and  unaltered,  when  the  Constitution  was 
adopted. 

The  question  came  before  the  House  of  Representatives 
the  first  time  just  seven  years  after  the  Constitution  was 
adopted,  and  has  been  before  the  House  many  times  since 
then.  The  Jay  Treaty  called  for  an  appropriation  of 
eighty  thousand  dollars.  It  was  a  very  unpopular  treaty, 
and  a  very  notable  debate  took  place  on  the  resolution  re- 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  373 

questing  the  President  to  lay  before  the  House  copies  of  the 
correspondence  and  other  papers  relating  to  the  treaty. 
President  Washington  declined  to  furnish  the  papers,  on  the 
ground  that  the  treaty  needed  no  legislative  action,  and  the 
House  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  treaties,  but  was 
morally  bound  to  make  the  appropriation,  thereby  carrying 
out  the  contract.  The  House  responded  by  passing  a  long 
series  of  resolutions ;  but  finally  the  appropriation  was  made. 

The  whole  question  has  been  discussed  in  the  House,  prac 
tically  every  time  an  appropriation  has  been  called  for 
to  carry  out  a  treaty;  but  the  House,  while  always  contend 
ing  that  it  had  a  voice  in  the  treaty-making  power,  never  de 
clined  to  make  the  appropriation,  and  only  on  one  occasion 
do  I  now  recall  that  the  House  declined  to  enact  legislation 
to  carry  out  a  treaty  where  the  treaty  specifically  itself  pro 
vided  for  such  legislation.  This  was  in  the  case  of  the  reci 
procity  treaty  with  Mexico,  negotiated  by  General  Grant. 

I  concluded  my  speech  in  the  Senate  with  this  statement: 

"This  question  before  us  here  has  been  before  the  Senate  for  a  hun 
dred  years.  The  Executive  and  Senate  have  taken  one  position,  and  that 
is,  a  treaty  is  the  supreme  law  of  the  land.  That  position  has  been 
sustained  by  the  Supreme  Court.  On  the  other  hand,  during  all  these 
hundred  years,  the  House  of  Representatives  has,  as  a  rule,  insisted  that 
they  should  be  considered  in  reference  to  certain  treaties.  That  does 
not  relieve  the  Senate  from  standing  by  its  prerogatives  and  rights 
and  insisting  that  the  rights  of  the  Executive  be  maintained.  The  point 
here  is  this:  The  Constitution  gives  to  the  Executive,  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate,  the  right  to  negotiate  treaties.  We  have  been 
negotiating  commercial  treaties  continuously  prior  and  subsequent  to  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution,  and  those  treaties  have  been  sustained  as  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land. 

"It  is  said  that  the  Constitution  has  given  to  Congress  the  right  to 
regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations,  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties, 
and  imposts,  and  to  the  House  of  Representatives  the  right  to  originate 
bills  for  raising  revenues,  and  to  the  President  and  Senate  the  right  to 


374     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

make  and  ratify  treaties.  These  are  all  co-equal  and  independent  powers. 
One  does  not  interfere  with  the  other.  One  is  not  exclusive  of  the  other. 
A  law  passed  in  any  of  the  ways  provided  by  the  Constitution  is  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land  until  it  is  changed  or  repealed.  A  treaty  made 
by  the  Executive  and  ratified  by  the  Senate  is  the  supreme  law  of  the 
land  as  well  as  an  act  of  Congress.  If  the  Congress  is  not  satisfied 
with  the  treaty,  it  has  a  perfect  right  to  repeal  it,  as  it  has  any  other  law ; 
but  until  such  action  is  taken,  the  treaty  remains  as  a  part  of  the  su 
preme  law  of  the  land;  and  I  cannot  see  any  distinction  between  treaties 
which  affect  the  tariff  laws,  and  treaties  affecting  any  other  law." 

The  subject  was  very  seriously  and  carefully  considered, 
but  it  was  thought  expedient  that  the  committee  should  not 
take  any  position  either  for  or  against  the  unlimited  power 
of  the  Senate  over  reciprocity  treaties.  It  was  Senator 
Spooner  who  suggested  that  each  of  the  treaties  be  amended 
by  inserting  therein  a  provision  that  "the  treaty  not  take 
effect  until  the  same  shall  have  been  approved  by  the  Con 
gress." 

The  merits  of  the  question  were  not  considered;  but  my 
position  was,  and  still  is,  that  amending  the  treaties  in  the 
manner  suggested  by  Senator  Spooner,  by  inference  indi 
cated  that  if  such  a  provision  had  not  been  inserted,  the 
treaties  would  go  into  effect  immediately  without  any  Con 
gressional  action. 

Aside  from  the  reciprocity  treaty  with  France,  none  of 
the  treaties  was  considered  by  the  Senate  itself.  I  pressed 
them  as  best  I  could,  but  Senator  Aldrich,  Senator  Hanna, 
and  other  advocates  of  high  protection,  were  so  bitterly  op 
posed  to  them  —  no  one  in  the  Senate  aside  from  myself 
seeming  to  have  much  interest  in  them  —  that  they  were 
dropped  and  allowed  to  expire  by  their  own  terms.  I  par 
ticularly  regretted  that  the  Kasson  treaties  were  not  ratified. 

Had  the  Senate  ratified  those  treaties,  a  large  number 
of  other  treaties  probably  would  Lave  been  negotiated,  and 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  375 

we  would  not  have  been  compelled  to  go  through  the  long 
struggle  and  agitation  over  the  passage  of  the  Aldrich-Payne 
Tariff  Bill.  There  would  have  been  no  tariff  revision  neces 
sary.  At  the  same  time,  we  could  not  possibly  help  vastly 
increasing  our  foreign  commerce.  It  was  a  very  short 
sighted  policy  on  the  part  of  Senator  Aldrich  and  others  in 
the  Senate  when  they  insisted  that  those  treaties  should  be 
killed.  After  it  was  determined,  and  it  became  so  known 
to  the  country  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  secure  the  rati 
fication  of  reciprocity  treaties,  the  agitation  for  tariff  revi 
sion  commenced,  and  finally  culminated  in  the  act  of  1909, 
which  resulted  in  the  election  of  a  Democratic  House  of 
Representatives. 

4  The  committee  did  favorably  report,  and  the  Senate  rati 
fy,  a  reciprocity  treaty  with  Cuba.  This  was  the  treaty  of 
December  11,  1902,  and  it  was  the  third  reciprocal  agree 
ment  in  all  our  history  ratified,  proclaimed,  and  placed  in 
effect.  The  first  one  was  the  treaty  of  1854,  providing  for 
reciprocity  with  Canada.  The  second  was  the  treaty  of 
1875,  with  the  Hawaiian  Islands,  and  the  third  and  the  only 
one  now  in  effect  is  the  treaty  with  Cuba. 

That  treaty  would  never  have  been  ratified,  and  would 
have  suffered  the  same  fate  as  the  Kasson  treaties,  had  it  not 
been  for  the  determined,  vigorous  fight  made  by  President 
Roosevelt  for  its  ratification,  and  had  not  Cuba  stood  in  a 
relation  to  us  entirely  different  from  any  other  country. 
We  bound  her  to  us  by  insisting  that  the  Platt  amendments 
be  made  a  part  of  her  Constitution,  and  in  addition  that  a 
treaty  be  made  between  the  two  countries  embodying  those 
amendments.  _ 

This  treaty  with  Cuba  and  the  law  carrying  it  into  effect 
were  the  occasion  of  a  very  bitter  struggle  in  both  Senate 


376     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  House.  The  sugar  and  tobacco  interests  used  all  the 
power  at  their  command  to  defeat,  first  the  treaty,  and  then 
the  law  carrying  the  treaty  into  effect.  The  beet-sugar 
people  asserted  that  it  would  ruin  that  industry,  and  that 
a  reduction  of  twenty  per  cent  on  Cuban  sugar  would 
enable  the  Cubans  to  ship  their  sugar  into  the  United 
States  and  undersell  the  beet  sugar.  I  never  could  see  that 
there  was  any  force  in  their  contention,  because  the  United 
States  does  not  produce  more  than  half  the  sugar  we  con 
sume,  and  it  was  absolutely  necessary  to  import  sugar  from 
Cuba  and  other  sugar-producing  countries. 

When  the  treaty  was  before  the  committee  for  consider 
ation,  it  was  amended  by  inserting  the  following  proviso: 

"Provided  that  while  this  convention  is  in  force,  no  sugar  exported 
from  the  Republic  of  Cuba  and  being  the  product  of  the  soil  or  indus 
try  of  the  Republic  of  Cuba,  shall  be  admitted  to  the  United  States  at 
a  reduction  of  duty  greater  than  twenty  per  centum  of  the  rates  of  duty 
thereon  as  provided  by  the  tariff  act  of  the  United  States,  approved  July 
24,  1897;  and  no  sugar,  the  product  of  any  other  foreign  country,  shall 
be  admitted  by  treaty  or  convention  into  the  United  States,  while  this  con 
vention  is  in  force,  at  a  lower  rate  of  duty  than  that  provided  by  the  tariff 
act  of  the  United  States,  approved  July  24,  1897." 

The  effect  of  this  amendment  was  not  only  to  prevent  a 
greater  reduction  being  made  on  Cuban  sugar,  but  it  had  a 
more  important  effect  in  that  it  made  reciprocity  treaties 
with  the  sugar-producing  countries,  including  the  West  In 
dies,  impossible  so  long  as  the  Cuban  treaty  remains  in  force. 

I  had  charge  of  this  treaty  in  the  Senate,  and  addressed 
the  Senate  at  considerable  length  explaining  its  provisions. 

There  was  a  spirited  contest  in  the  Senate  over  the  ratifi 
cation  of  the  treaty,  but  there  was  more  of  a  contest  both 
in  the  Senate  and  the  House  when  the  bill  to  carry  the 
treaty  into  effect  came  up  at  the  next  session  of  Congress,  it 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  377 

first  having-  been  considered  at  a  special  session  called  by 
President  Roosevelt  in  November,  1903.  A  provision  was 
inserted  in  the  treaty  (which  I  opposed,  as  I  thought  it  was 
unnecessary) ,  that  it  should  not  go  into  effect  until  it  was  ap 
proved  by  the  Congress.  The  bill  was  passed  in  the  House 
and  came  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  was  con 
sidered  there,  and  favorably  reported  to  the  Senate.  The 
bill,  of  course,  was  considered  in  open  session,  and  I  again 
made  some  remarks,  probably  more  in  the  nature  of  a  re 
port  than  a  speech,  trying  to  show  where  the  treaty  was  not 
only  absolutely  necessary,  if  Cuba  was  to  be  prosperous  at  all, 
but  that  it  would  open  a  considerable  market  for  American 
products. 

The  Cuban  reciprocity  treaty  has  increased  very  materially 
our  trade  with  that  Republic.  Since  that  treaty  went  into 
effect  our  imports  from  Cuba  have  increased  from  $62,942,- 
000  in  value  to  $122,528,000  in  value;  and  our  exports  to 
Cuba  have  increased  from  $21,000,000  in  1903,  to  nearly 
$53,000,000  in  1910,  or  more  than  doubled.  But  even  with 
this  considerable  increase  in  our  exports  to  Cuba,  I  had  hoped 
that  by  this  time  we  should  have  increased  them  to  at  least 
one  hundred  million  dollars.  Our  own  exporters  and  manu 
facturers  are  at  fault,  because  they  will  not  do  business  with 
the  Cubans  on  the  same  credit  basis  as  will  the  exporters  of 
Spain,  Germany,  and  England ;  and  American  exporters  do 
not  cater  to  the  peculiar  needs  of  the  Cubans.  They  seem 
to  go  on  the  theory  that  if  their  goods  are  good  enough  for 
Americans  they  should  be  good  enough  for  Cubans,  too. 

The  Cuban  treaty  is  a  good  illustration  of  the  scare  and 
the  unwarranted  opposition  on  the  part  of  American  indus 
tries  when  even  the  slightest  reduction  of  the  tariff  is  at 
tempted.  To  listen  to  the  beet-sugar  and  tobacco  interests 
during  the  consideration  of  the  Cuban  treaty,  one  would 


378     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

think  they  would  have  been  absolutely  ruined  if  the  treaty 
were  ratified.  The  Cuban  treaty  has  not  in  the  slightest 
degree  injuriously  affected  the  American  sugar  or  tobacco 
interests. 

The  principle  of  Reciprocity  as  heretofore  applied  in  this 
country  has  been  extended  somewhat  by  the  agreement  of 
1911  between  the  United  States  and  Canada.  This  com 
pact  was  negotiated  by  President  Taft  and  Secretary  Knox 
on  the  one  side,  and  by  Premier  Laurier  and  Mr.  Fielding 
on  the  other.  Under  this  agreement  a  wide  exchange  of 
articles  of  every-day  use  is  provided  for,  and  it  is  hoped  and 
believed  that  if  the  treaty  becomes  effective  it  will  prove 
more  satisfactory  and  enduring  than  the  previous  reciprocal 
agreement  with  the  Dominion  of  Canada. 

The  pending  agreement  was  entered  into  between  repre- 
sensatives  of  the  two  Governments  in  January,  1911,  but 
it  was  not  until  the  latter  part  of  July  of  that  year  that  a 
law  was  enacted  by  Congress  to  provide  for  its  enforcement. 
Much  opposition  was  manifested,  especially  in  the  Senate, 
in  both  the  Sixty-first  and  Sixty-second  Congresses,  on  the 
ground  that  under  its  terms  a  great  many  agricultural  prod 
ucts  are  admitted  free  from  Canada;  but  this  objection  has 
been,  I  think,  successfully  met  by  the  Administration  and 
its  friends  in  the  argument  that  any  injury  that  might  be 
sustained  by  agriculture  would  be  more  than  compensated 
for  by  the  benefits  derived  by  the  manufacturing  interests. 
For  one  I  never  have  believed  that  agriculture  would  suffer 
in  any  degree  through  the  operation  of  the  agreement,  and 
I  do  believe  that  the  general  industries  of  the  country  will 
experience  much  benefit.  Too  much  is  to  be  gained  through 
the  cultivation  of  proper  trade  relations  with  our  great  and 
growing  neighbor  on  the  North  to  abandon  the  general  prin- 


WORK  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  379 

ciple  involved  in  the  agreement  on  account  of  an  apprehen 
sion  which  may  not  and  probably  will  not  be  realized. 

In  many  respects  nations  are  like  individuals,  and  in  their 
relations  with  one  another  they  should  be  controlled  by  the 
same  rules  of  amity  and  equity  as  pertain  to  the  associations 
of  mankind  generally.  In  the  end  no  nation  can  lose 
any  material  thing  through  an  act  of  generosity  or  fair- 
dealing. 

Notwithstanding  the  United  States  has  acted  favorably 
upon  the  agreement,  it  is  not  yet  in  force.  This  circum 
stance  is  due  to  the  fact  that  in  the  matter  of  ratification 
Canada  has  waited  upon  this  country.  There  is  opposition 
there  as  there  was  here,  and  at  this  writing  (August,  1911) 
Sir  Wilfred  Laurier  is  engaged  in  a  struggle  for  favorable 
endorsement  such  as  that  from  which  President  Taft  has 
just  emerged. 


CHAPTER  XXV 

THE    INTER-OCEANIC    CANAL 

PROBABLY  the  most  important  work  before  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations  since  the  treaty  of  peace 
with  Spain,  were  the  several  treaties  concerning  the  con 
struction  of  the  Isthmian  Canal. 

In  1850,  the  United  States  entered  into  what  is  known 
as  the  Clayton-Bulwer  Treaty  with  Great  Britain,  the  pur 
pose  of  which  was  to  facilitate  the  construction  of  a  canal; 
but  instead  of  operating  to  this  end,  it  stood  for  fifty  years 
or  more  as  an  effectual  barrier  against  the  construction  by 
the  United  States  of  any  canal  across  the  Isthmus  of 
Panama.  Succeeding  Administrations  had  endeavored  to 
secure  the  consent  of  Great  Britain  to  its  abrogation,  but  it 
was  not  until  Secretary  Hay's  time  that  Great  Britain 
finally  agreed  to  annul  it  and  substitute  in  its  place  a  new 
treaty.  Secretary  Hay  had  been  Ambassador  to  Great 
Britain,  and  he  enjoyed  the  confidence  of  the  then  existing 
British  Ministry  to  a  greater  degree  than  almost  any  minister 
or  ambassador  we  have  ever  sent  to  Great  Britain.  After 
entering  the  State  Department,  Mr.  Hay  at  once  directed  his 
attention  to  the  making  of  a  new  treaty  with  Great  Britain 
and  this  resulted  in  the  first  Hay-Pauncefote  Treaty.  This 
convention  was  considered  by  the  committee,  but  was  not 
found  satisfactory,  and  certain  amendments  were  added  to 
it.  These  amendments  Great  Britain  would  not  accept,  and 
the  treaty  died. 

Secretary  Hay  was  very  much  disappointed,  but  he  at 

380 


THE  INTEROCEANIC  CANAL  381 

once  set  to  work  to  negotiate  such  a  treaty  as  would  go 
through  the  Senate  without  amendment  and  such  a  one  as 
Great  Britain  would  consent  to.  He  wrote  to  a  number  of 
Senators,  members  of  the  committee,  I  suppose,  asking  for 
suggestions  as  to  just  what  the  Senate  would  agree  to.  I 
was  not  at  that  time  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,  but  I  was  very  deeply  interested  in  the  subject 
and  had  given  it  considerable  study  and  thought.  Secretary 
Hay  wrote  me,  and  I  replied  at  length,  giving  my  views 
both  as  to  the  Clayton-Bulwer  Treaty  and  what  I  thought 
should  be  inserted  in  the  new  treaty. 

Mr.  Hay  promptly  renewed  negotiations,  which  resulted 
in  what  is  known  as  the  second  Hay-Pauncefote  Treaty. 
After  a  good  deal  of  effort  this  agreement  was  ratified  with 
out  amendment.  This  act  signalized  the  beginning  of  my 
service  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 

The  principal  contention  arose  over  the  subject  of  fortifi 
cations,  a  question  that  is  still  a  mooted  one.  It  occurs  to 
me  that  the  proper  reasoning  is  this  —  and  I  believe  I  took 
the  same  position  when  the  treaty  was  under  consideration: 

The  first  and  second  Hay-Pauncefote  treaties  must  be 
construed  together;  the  first  Hay-Pauncefote  Treaty  con 
tained  a  prohibition  against  fortification;  the  second  Hay- 
Pauncefote  Treaty  neither  prohibited  nor  in  terms  agreed  to 
fortifications,  but  was  silent  on  the  subject;  therefore,  the 
legal  construction  would  be  that  Great  Britain  had  receded 
from  the  position  that  the  canal  should  not  be  fortified.  In 
any  event,  we  will  go  ahead  and  fortify  the  canal,  and  do 
with  it  whatever  we  please,  regardless  of  any  of  the  nations 
of  the  world. 

That  obstacle  having  been  finally  removed,  the  question 
which  next  arose  was :  What  route  should  be  selected  ?  The 
selection  of  the  route  was  not  a  subject  over  which  the  For- 


382     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

eign  Relations  Committee  had  jurisdiction;  but  after  the 
Panama  route  was  decided  on,  it  became  necessary  to  nego 
tiate  with  Colombia,  the  owner  of  that  route,  for  the  right  of 
way  for  the  canal.  Secretary  Hay  promptly  proceeded  with 
the  negotiation,  as  it  was  his  duty  to  do,  under  the  Spooner 
Act,  and  on  January  3,  1903,  submitted  the  treaty  to  the 
Senate  for  its  Constitutional  action  thereon.  Senator  Mor 
gan  and  others  led  the  fight  against  it ;  but  a  vote  was  taken, 
and  the  treaty  was  ordered  favorably  reported.  On  Febru 
ary  12,  1903,  I  called  it  up  in  the  Senate  and  made  quite 
an  extended  speech,  explaining  its  provisions,  and  urging 
its  ratification.  The  session  was  to  close  on  March  4,  and 
it  finally  became  manifest  that  it  would  be  hopeless  to  at 
tempt  to  ratify  it  before  that  day,  and  the  effort  was 
abandoned.  President  Roosevelt  called  a  special  session  of 
the  Senate  after  the  fourth  of  March,  when  there  would  be 
nothing  for  the  Senate  to  consider  except  the  Colombia 
treaty  and  other  executive  matters.  According  to  the  usual 
rule,  the  treaty  was  referred  back  to  the  committee,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  special  session,  and  the  subject  was  again 
gone  over  in  committee  as  if  there  had  been  no  proceedings 
on  it  at  all  during  the  regular  session.  The  proposed  agree 
ment  was  finally  reported  to  the  Senate,  and  ratified.  There 
is  no  need  for  me  to  go  over  the  story  of  its  rejection  by 
Colombia.  The  action  of  the  Colombian  Congress  was  a 
hold-up  pure  and  simple,  and  the  treaty  was  rejected  in  the 
hope  that  the  United  States  would  offer  a  greater  amount 
for  the  right-of-way.  \  Panama  promptly  seceded,  which  she 
had  a  perfect  right  to"  do.  Many  people  have  charged  that 
the  Roosevelt  Administration  actually  incited  the  revolution. 
Whether  this  is  true  or  not,  I  do  not  know.  I  contended 
at  the  time,  and  still  believe,  that  it  is  not  true.  I  hope  it 
is  not;  but  the  correspondence  did  show  that  the  State  De- 


THE  INTEROCEANIC  CANAL  383 

partment  had  pretty  close  knowledge  of  events  which  were 
occurring  on  the  Isthmus,  and  had  seen  to  it  that  there  was 
a  sufficient  naval  force  in  the  vicinity  "to  protect  American 
interests."  It  was  a  remarkable  revolution  —  I  think  the 
most  remarkable  I  have  ever  read  of  in  history.  It  was 
practically  bloodless.  One  or  two  shots  were  fired,  a  China 
man  was  killed,  and  yet  a  new  and  independent  republic 
entered  the  family  of  Nations.  / 

We  were  able  to  make  with  Panama  a  much  more  satis 
factory  treaty  than  we  had  with  Colombia.  Senator  Mor 
gan  this  time  was  assisted  by  most  of  his  Democratic  col 
leagues;  he  denounced  the  treaty  and  made  all  sorts  of 
charges  against  the  Administration ;  but  after  numerous  long 
sessions  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  I  was 
authorized  to  report  it  to  the  Senate  with  certain  minor 
amendments,  which,  in  my  opening  speech,  I  asked  the  Sen 
ate  to  reject,  and  to  ratify  the  treaty  without  amendment. 
I  did  this  at  the  earnest  insistence  of  the  State  Department. 
And,  in  addition,  I  did  not  think  that  the  amendments  were 
of  such  importance  as  would  justify  resubmitting  the  treaty 
to  Panama  after  that  little  country  had  once  ratified  it.  The 
State  Department  was  led  to  this  action  by  the  receipt  of  the 
following  cable  from  Mr.  Buchanan,  the  first  Minister  of 
the  United  States  to  Panama : 

"PANAMA,  January  22,  1904. 
"HAY,  WASHINGTON: 

"I  can  not  refrain  from  referring  to  my  belief  that  no  amendments 
to  the  treaty  should  be  made.  The  delimitation  of  Panama  and  Colon 
involves  several  things  which  can  only  be  satisfactorily  adjusted  on  the 
ground  by  joint  action.  There  are  several  other  points  in  the  treaty 
which  will  require  a  mutual  working  agreement,  or  regulation,  including 
sanitation.  While  the  treaty  covers  broadly  all  these  things,  my  observa 
tion  here  is  that  the  details  of  development  of  the  authority  conferred 
by  the  treaty  in  these  regards  can  not  be  satisfactorily  carried  out  by 


384    FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

amendments,  but  should  be  done  through  a  mutually  agreed  upon  regu 
lation  or  understanding  reached  here  on  the  ground  between  the  two 
countries.  The  executive  power  here  can  secure  from  the  convention 
ample  authority  to  do  such  things  without  their  being  referred  to  the 
convention  hereafter.  Would  it  not  be  possible  and  best  to  adopt  this 
course  with  these  amendments  to  the  treaty;  will  bring  up  here  much 
discussion  of  many  articles  which  can  all  be  avoided  and  our  purpose 
gained  by  above  course.  Any  time  when  any  specific  grants  of  land 
or  power  not  implied  in  the  treaty  is  desired,  it  appears  to  me  the  wise 
course  to  take  will  be  to  do  this  by  a  supplemental  convention. 

"(Signed)   BUCHANAN." 

Secretary  Hay  showed  the  most  eager  anxiety  to  have  the 
treaty  ratified  as  it  stood,  and  he  wrote  me  quite  a  lengthy 
letter  on  the  subject,  which  I  now  feel  at  liberty  to  quote. 

"DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE,  WASHINGTON. 

"January  20,  1904. 
"DEAR  SENATOR  CULLOM:  — 

"I  enclose  a  copy  of  a  letter  from  the  Panama  Minister  which  he  sent 
me  last  night.  He,  as  well  as  Mr.  Buchanan,  who  is  on  the  ground, 
is  greatly  disturbed  over  the  possible  complications  which  may  arise  if 
amendments  are  added  to  the  treaty  in  the  Senate.  Of  course,  I  need 
not  say  nobody  questions  the  right  of  the  Senate  to  amend  the  treaty  as 
may  seem  to  them  best.  I  am  only  speaking  of  the  matter  of  op 
portuneness  and  expediency.  We  insisted  on  an  immediate  ratification  of 
the  treaty  by  the  Panama  Government,  and  they  acceded  to  our  wishes. 
If  we  now,  after  a  very  long  delay,  send  the  treaty  back  to  them  amended, 
you  can  at  once  imagine  the  state  of  things  that  it  will  find  there.  The 
moment  of  unanimity  and  enthusiasm,  which  only  comes  once  in  the 
life  of  a  revolution,  will  have  passed  away  and  given  way  to  the  play 
of  politics  and  factions.  They  will  have  a  certain  advantage  which 
they  have  not  had  before  in  dealing  with  the  matter.  We  shall  have 
ratified  the  treaty  with  amendments,  which  gives  them  another  chance  to 
revise  their  perhaps  hasty  and  enthusiastic  action.  They  will  consider 
themselves  as  entitled  to  make  amendments  as  well  as  we,  and  it  needs 
only  a  glance  at  the  treaty  to  show  what  an  infinite  field  of  amendments 
there  is  from  every  point  of  view.  The  Junta  in  making  their  report 
to  the  present  Constitutional  Convention  said  that,  although  many  of 


THE  INTEROCEANIC  CANAL  385 

the  provisions  seemed  harsh  and  hard,  yet  it  was  judged  for  the  public 
good  to  accept  it  as  it  was.  When  they  get  the  amended  treaty  in  their 
hands  again,  they  will  compare  it  with  the  treaty  we  made  with  Colom 
bia,  and  see  how  vastly  more  advantageous  to  us  this  treaty  is  than  that 
one  was,  and  there  are  never  lacking  in  a  body  of  men  like  the  Consti 
tutional  Convention  a  plenty  of  members  who  like  to  distinguish  them 
selves  by  defending  the  interests  of  their  country  through  the  advantageous 
amendment  of  a  treaty.  Meanwhile  the  country  will  be  open  to  the 
intrigues  of  the  Colombians,  and  even  to  the  military  attacks  upon  the 
frontier. 

"All  these  considerations  would,  of  course,  have  no  weight  whatever 
if  the  amendments  were  vital  to  our  interests,  but,  as  I  said  to  you 
yesterday,  it  was  the  opinion  of  all  of  us  who  have  studied  the  matter 
that  every  point  made  by  the  amendments  was  intended  to  be  covered  — 
I  do  not  say  how  successfully  —  by  the  provisions  of  the  treaty  itself. 
This  letter  of  Mr.  Varilla's  shows  that  the  intentions  of  each  Govern 
ment  were  thoroughly  understood  by  the  other,  exactly  in  the  sense  of  the 
amendments  now  proposed.  I  earnestly  hope  that  our  friends  in  the 
Senate  may  see  the  strength  of  our  present  position  if  the  treaty  is 
ratified  without  amendment,  and  the  certain  complications  that  will 
arise  if,  after  a  long  debate  here,  the  treaty  is  put  once  more  in  the  hands 
of  the  Panamans  for  reconsideration  and  amendment. 

"If  the  object  of  the  amendments,  as  some  people  say,  is  to  get  it  rati 
fied  by  the  new  permanent  Government,  nothing  is  easier.  I  have  no 
doubt  we  can  have  a  solemn  resolution  of  that  sort  adopted  by  the  Con 
vention  at  any  time. 

"Very  sincerely  yours, 

"The  Honorable  S.  M.  Cullom,  "JOHN  HAY. 

United  States  Senate." 

After  nearly  a  month  and  a  half  of  debate  in  executive 
session,  devoted  to  its  consideration,  the  treaty  was  finally 
ratified  without  amendment. 

Considerable  discussion  arose  over  the  question  of  the 
recognition  of  Panama  and  the  right  of  that  country  to  make 
the  treaty  at  all.  I  contended  in  the  Senate,  in  open  as  well 
as  executive  session,  that  the  new  Republic  of  Panama  had 

a  perfect  right  to  make  the  treaty  with  the  United  States 

25 


386     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

because  it  was  a  complete,  sovereign,  and  independent  State. 
The  recognition  given  the  new  Government  was  the  highest 
recognition  we  could  accord.  It  was  not  a  recognition  of 
belligerency,  which  is  only  a  recognition  that  war  exists;  it 
was  not  a  virtual  recognition,  which  is  a  recognition  only  for 
commercial  purposes ;  but  it  was  what  Pomeroy  and  Fillmore 
define  to  be  a  formal  recognition  —  that  is,  an  absolute  recog 
nition  of  independence  and  sovereignty.  The  recognition  of 
the  Republic  was  a  complete  and  formal  recognition  of  in 
dependence,  because  the  President  had  received  an  envoy- 
extraordinary  and  minister-plenipotentiary  from  that  State. 
The  United  States  Senate  was  a  party  to  that  complete  and 
formal  recognition,  because  we  confirmed  the  nomination  of 
Mr.  Buchanan  as  envoy-extraordinary  and  minister-pleni 
potentiary  to  that  country. 

This  ended  the  long  fight  over  the  construction  of  the 
Panama  Canal  —  at  least,  so  far  as  it  in  any  way  involved 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 
With  the  ratification  of  the  treaty,  the  subject  was  trans 
ferred  to  the  Committee  on  Interoceanic  Canals,  where,  dur 
ing  every  session,  matters  of  more  or  less  importance  con 
nected  with  the  canal  are  considered. 

I  do  not  know  whether  or  not  it  was  wise  to  change  from 
the  Nicaraguan  to  the  Panama  route.  Senator  Hanna  and 
Senator  Spooner  were  responsible  for  the  change;  and  time 
alone  will  demonstrate  whether  we  acted  wisely. 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

SANTO  DOMINGO'S  FISCAL  AFFAIRS 

FOR  some  years  the  Santo  Domingo  protocol  and  treaty 
were  before  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and 
in  the  Senate.  They  came  before  the  Senate  very  suddenly. 
On  January  20,  1905,  there  appeared  in  the  press  what  pur 
ported  to  be  a  protocol,  agreed  to  by  Commander  Dillingham 
on  the  one  hand,  and  Minister  Sanchez  of  the  Dominican 
Republic  on  the  other,  by  the  terms  of  which  the  United 
States  was  to  take  charge  of  the  custom  houses  of  the  Do 
minican  Republic,  adjust  and  liquidate  its  debt,  and  gen 
erally  to  take  charge  of  the  fiscal  affairs  of  the  Republic. 
By  the  terms  of  this  protocol,  it  was  to  go  into  effect  Feb 
ruary  1,  and  there  was  no  provision  at  all  for  Senatorial 
action.  Senator  Beacon  and  other  Democratic  Senators  be 
came  very  much  aroused  over  this  as  a  usurpation  of  the 
rights  of  the  Senate.  Resolutions  were  introduced,  calling 
upon  the  State  Department  for  information,  and  the  sub 
ject  was  considered  by  the  committee  at  several  meetings. 

In  the  meantime  the  protocol  of  an  agreement  was  sub 
mitted  to  the  Senate  for  ratification.  It  substantially  em 
bodied  the  Dillingham- Sanchez  agreement. 

I  confess  that  I  too  was  considerably  surprised  at  the 
action  of  the  State  Department,  and  I  called  on  Secretary 
Hay  one  morning  and  asked  to  be  informed  as  to  the  facts. 

Secretary  Hay  stated  that  he  would  communicate  with 
me  in  writing,  which  he  did  on  March  13,  1905,  saying: 

"In  answer  to  your  verbal  request,  I  submit  herewith  a  statement  of 
the  facts  with  reference  to  the  making  of  the  Santo  Domingo  protocol, 

387 


388     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

and  enclose  herewith  a  copy  of  the  protocol  of  January  20,  1905.  That 
protocol  was  not  drawn  up  by  the  Department  of  State  and  was  never 
seen  by  any  of  its  officials  until  it  appeared  in  the  newspapers  on  Janu 
ary  22d  last,  as  given  out  by  the  Dominican  officials.  The  Department 
has  never  authorized  its  signing;  it  never  gave  any  instructions  author 
izing  its  signature;  and  no  full  powers  had  ever  been  given  authorizing 
the  signature  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  Government.  The  Min 
ister  of  Foreign  Affairs  of  the  Dominican  Republic  visited  Washington 
during  the  Spring  of  1904,  and  during  a  stay  of  nearly  three  months 
repeatedly  solicited  the  assistance  of  the  United  States  Government  for 
the  restoration  of  order  in  the  island  and  for  the  regeneration  of  his 
country,  but  the  responsible  officials  of  the  Department  advised  against 
meeting  his  request,  and  the  President,  to  whom  the  matter  was  referred, 
decided  against  taking  any  action  as  long  as  it  could  wisely  be  avoided. 

"The  Dominican  Government  again  brought  the  matter  to  the  atten 
tion  of  the  United  States  Minister  at  Santo  Domingo  the  latter  part  of 
1904.  In  the  meantime  an  investigation  had  been  going  on  quietly 
by  our  Government  through  Commander  Dillingham,  to  obtain  informa 
tion  as  to  the  real  condition  in  the  island.  After  the  President  became 
thus  familiar  with  the  situation  there,  and  on  the  report  of  the  United 
States  Minister,  and  after  repeated  requests  for  help  from  the  Dominican 
Government,  the  Department  of  State,  on  January  6,  1905,  prepared  a 
cablegram  setting  forth  the  basis  on  which  alone  the  United  States  would 
be  able  to  render  assistance. 

"Neither  that  cablegram  nor  any  other  despatch  whatsoever  went  further 
than  simply  lay  down  a  basis;  and  acting  on  this,  but  without  instruc 
tions  authorizing  it,  the  Dillingham-Sanchez  protocol  was  signed.  The 
Department  was  advised  by  cable  on  January  20  that  an  arrangement 
had  been  agreed  to,  and  thereupon  the  Department  officials  at  once  set 
to  work  to  prepare  a  treaty;  and  its  officials  were  actually  engaged  in 
drafting  one  to  send  to  Santo  Domingo,  when  the  publication  of  the  pro 
tocol  of  January  20  appeared.  The  Department  at  once  cabled  to  Santo 
Domingo  to  forward  a  copy  of  the  protocol;  and  as  soon  as  its  text  could 
be  received,  the  Department  began  work  in  making  amendments  and 
adjusting  terms  on  which  the  United  States  Government  could  consent 
to  act.  As  soon  as  the  two  Governments  could  arrive  at  substantial 
agreement  as  to  the  terms,  full  powers  were  communicated  to  Dawson, 
and  the  protocol  now  before  the  Senate  was  accordingly  signed. 

"In  view  of  the  misapprehensions  that  at  once  arose,  growing  out  of 


SANTO  DOMINGO'S  FISCAL  AFFAIRS     389 

publication  of  the  protocol,,  which  upon  its  face  stated  it  was  to  go 
into  effect  February  1st,  and  from  which  it  might  naturally  be  inferred 
it  was  intended  to  go  into  effect  before  the  Senate  could  have  an  oppor 
tunity  to  consider  it,  and  without  its  having  been  referred  to  the  Sen 
ate  for  consideration,  I  considered  the  question  of  the  propriety  of 
stating  the  fact  that  no  instructions  and  no  powers  had  even  been  granted 
authorizing  the  signing  of  the  protocol  of  January  20.  The  decision 
was  reached  that  repudiation  of  the  action  of  Dillingham  and  Dawson 
might  be  construed  as  a  censure,  and  that  it  might  cause  offence  to  them 
as  well  as  to  their  friends,  who  might  feel  that  when  the  circumstances 
should  become  fully  known,  that  Dillingham  and  Dawson  were  justi 
fiable  in  assuming  the  responsibility  they  did  in  signing  the  protocol 
instead  of  making  a  formal  memorandum  of  the  basis  agreed  on  and 
communicating  it  to  the  Department  for  the  drafting  of  a  treaty.  Both 
of  these  officials  have  a  record  of  faithful  and  skilful  service  and  compe 
tency,  and  it  was  hoped  when  the  facts  should  become  more  fully  known, 
a  correct  understanding  of  the  actual  situation  would  remove  any  ill  ef 
fects  of  previous  misapprehension. 

"The  department  has  been  advised  that  the  protocol  of  January  20  was 
given  out  for  publication  by  the  Dominican  Government  in  order  to 
calm  the  popular  mind  on  account  of  its  uncertainty  as  to  the  character 
of  negotiations  which  were  actually  being  carried  on  between  the  two 
Governments.  (Signed)  JOHN  HAY." 

From  1865,  until  the  time  that  the  United  States  assumed 
the  collection  of  customs,  conditions  in  Santo  Domingo  were 
about  as  bad  as  they  could  be  in  every  respect.  One  revolu 
tion  succeeded  another.  There  had  been  twenty-six  different 
Administrations  since  1865,  only  one  of  which  was  brought 
about  by  means  of  a  regular  election.  Most  of  the  others 
were  caused  by  revolutions,  assassination,  forced  resigna 
tions,  and  a  general  condition  of  anarchy.  Debt  after  debt, 
bond  issue  after  bond  issue,  piled  up,  each  Administration 
seemingly  bent  only  on  seeing  how  much  actual  cash  could 
be  raised,  utterly  regardless  of  obligations  assumed.  None 
of  the  principal  and  only  a  trifling  portion  of  the  interest 
were  paid,  and  it  seems  that  the  different  Administrations 


390     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

never  had  any  intention  of  liquidating  the  obligations  of  the 
Republic.  The  principal  portion  of  the  bonds  was  held  by 
European  creditors. 

But  finally  the  Santo  Domingo  Improvement  Company, 
an  American  corporation,  succeeded  as  the  fiscal  agents  of 
the  Republic,  to  float  its  bond  issues.  The  improvement  com 
pany  was  displayed,  and  its  claim  was  settled  for  four  million, 
five  hundred  thousand  dollars.  Then  a  protocol  was  entered 
into  between  the  United  States  and  Santo  Domingo  by  which 
the  manner  of  payment  was  submitted  to  arbitration,  our 
arbitrators  being  Judge  George  Gray  and  John  G.  Car 
lisle.  An  award  was  rendered  providing  that  an  agent  of 
the  United  States  should  take  possession  of  certain  custom 
houses,  in  order  to  pay  a  debt  which  the  Government  of 
Santo  Domingo  had  acknowledged  to  be  due  an  American 
corporation. 

This  did  not  satisfy  foreign  creditors,  French,  Belgian 
and  Italian,  who  had  actually  been  given,  by  an  agreement 
with  Santo  Domingo,  the  right  to  collect  revenues  at  certain 
custom  houses.  Santo  Domingo  appealed  to  the  United 
States  and  the  foreign  Governments  threatened  that  if  the 
United  States  did  not  enforce  some  remedial  plan,  they 
would  be  compelled  to  take  action  for  the  relief  of  their  own 
citizens,  whose  claims  aggregated  twenty  million  dollars. 
Italian  warships  were  already  in  Santo  Domingo  waters 
ready  to  enforce  their  demands.  This,  briefly,  was  the  con 
dition  of  affairs  when  the  protocol  of  1905  was  submitted 
to  the  Senate  for  ratification. 

For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  we  have  had  a  pe 
culiar  interest  in  Santo  Domingo.  As  is  well  known,  under 
the  Administration  of  President  Grant  a  treaty  was  nego 
tiated  and  sent  to  the  Senate  providing  for  the  annexation  of 
Santo  Domingo.  Senator  Sumner  was  Chairman  of  the 


THEODORE    ROOSEVELT 


SANTO  DOMINGO'S  FISCAL  AFFAIRS     391 

Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and  as  such  was  able  to 
prevent  the  consideration  of  the  treaty  by  the  committee, 
and  its  ratification  by  the  Senate.  Some  one  said  that  the 
only  objection  that  Charles  Sumner  had  to  the  treaty  was 
that  President  Grant  had  suggested  it  first.  This  was  one 
of  the  reasons  why  Senator  Sumner  was  deposed  as  chair 
man  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee.  It  would  prob 
ably  have  been  better  for  the  United  States,  and  it  certainly 
would  have  been  better  for  the  Dominican  Republic,  if  the 
treaty  had  been  ratified. 

The  protocol  submitted  to  the  Senate  involved  very  large 
responsibilities  on  the  part  of  the  United  States.  It  pro 
vided  that  the  United  States  was  to  adjust  all  the  obligations 
of  the  Republic,  the  arrangement  of  the  payment,  to  pass 
upon  all  claims  of  Santo  Domingo,  determine  their  amount 
and  validity,  take  charge  of  all  the  custom  houses,  and  col 
lect  and  disburse  the  customs  receipts,  giving  to  Santo 
Domingo  forty-five  per  cent  of  the  customs  receipts  and  de 
voting  the  balance  to  the  liquidation  of  her  debts. 

This  protocol  had  the  active  opposition  of  the  minority 
on  the  committee  and  in  the  Senate  and,  in  addition,  such 
conservative  members  as  Senator  Hale  and  other  prominent 
Republicans  opposed  it.  We  fought  over  it  in  committee 
month  after  month;  but  finally,  on  March  10,  1905,  it  was 
reported  by  me  to  the  Senate  with  a  large  number  of  amend 
ments.  It  was  considered  by  the  Senate,  recommitted  at  the 
end  of  the  Congress,  and  again  reported  at  the  following 
Congress.  But  those  in  favor  of  it  became  convinced  that 
we  did  not  have  the  two-thirds  necessary  to  ratify  it,  and 
it  was  never  brought  to  a  vote.  It  was  thought  that  noth 
ing  more  would  be  heard  of  the  Santo  Domingo  protocol; 
but  Senator  Root,  when  Secretary  of  State,  took  the  subject 
up  de  novo,  and  made  a  new  treaty,  in  which  the  United 


392     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

States  did  not  assume  the  broad  obligations  it  assumed  under 
the  first  one,  and  which  was  not  generally  of  so  complicated  a 
character. 

It  imposed  the  duty  upon  the  Santo  Domingo  Republic 
itself  of  arriving  at  an  adjustment  with  its  creditors,  con 
ditioned  only  on  the  administration  of  the  custom  houses  by 
the  United  States. 

In  the  meantime,  an  arrangement  was  made  by  American 
banking  houses  to  furnish  the  money  to  liquidate  the  debt; 
the  creditors  were  satisfied;  the  foreign  debt  was  liquidated 
on  a  basis  of  fifty  per  cent  of  the  face  value,  and  domestic 
debts  and  other  claims  less  than  ten  per  cent.  A  loan  of 
twenty  million  dollars  was  made  through  Kuhn,  Loeb  & 
Company,  of  which  the  Dominican  Republic  received  nine 
teen  million  dollars  for  the  payment  of  its  debts;  seventeen 
million  dollars  was  used  to  satisfy  thirty-one  million,  eight 
thousand  dollars  worth  of  bonded  debts,  and  the  remaining 
two  million,  two  thousand  dollars  were  to  go  for  internal  im 
provements. 

There  was  some  objection  to  the  ratification  of  the  treaty 
negotiated  by  Secretary  Root,  but  not  of  a  very  serious 
character,  and  the  treaty  went  through,  even  Senator  Mor 
gan  not  opposing  it.  I  had  the  honor  of  reporting  it  and 
having  charge  of  it  in  the  Senate. 

The  treaty  has  now  been  in  force  several  years,  and  it 
has  proved  even  more  advantageous  than  was  expected  when 
it  was  ratified.  It  has  restored  order  in  the  Republic,  and 
the  country's  debts  are  rapidly  being  liquidated.  The  time 
may  come  when  the  United  States  may  be  compelled  to  take 
similar  action  with  some  of  the  other  republics  south  of  us. 
Such  action  would  be  beneficial  both  to  the  United  States 
and  to  the  people  of  those  republics. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

DIPLOMATIC    AGREEMENTS   BY    PROTOCOL 

T^vURING  the  public  discussion  of  the  Santo  Domingo 


question  and  the  protocol  by  which  the  Santo  Do 
mingo  Improvement  Company  claim  was  sent  to  arbitra 
tion,  and  later  during  the  consideration  of  it,  there  was 
criticism  of  the  Executive  branch  of  the  Government  on  ac 
count  of  its  disposition  to  make  international  agreements  of 
various  kinds,  and  put  them  into  operation  without  submit 
ting  them  to  the  Senate.  The  practice  became  more  general 
under  President  McKinley  and  Secretary  Hay  than  it  had 
under  other  Administrations,  and  it  seemed  the  policy  to  get 
along  in  every  case,  if  possible,  without  Senatorial  action. 
It  was  a  subject  in  which  I  took  very  great  interest;  I  came 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  practice  had  become  too  general, 
and  I  took  occasion  to  tell  Secretary  Hay  my  views. 

I  found  that  the  State  Department,  under  different  Ad 
ministrations,  had  submitted  private  claims  of  our  citizens 
against  foreign  Governments  to  arbitration  by  protocol. 
This  has  been  the  rule  frequently  adopted  for  very  many 
years.  There  were  cases,  I  found,  where  the  protocol  sub 
mitting  a  claim  to  arbitration  had  been  sent  to  the  Senate 
and  ratified,  and  it  was  the  general  rule  that  where  a  claim 
is  presented  by  a  foreign  Government  against  this  Govern 
ment,  and  the  same  is  submitted  to  arbitration,  it  is  done 
by  treaty. 

I  took  occasion  to  look  into  the  question  of  the  effect  of 
an  unratified  protocol.  It  may  be  said  generally  that  an 

393 


394     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

unratified  protocol  differs  from  a  treaty  in  that  the  protocol 
is  not  ratified  by  the  Senate  and  is  not  a  part  of  the  supreme 
law  of  the  land.  Under  our  system  of  government,  treaties 
occupy  a  unique  position.  They  are  not  only  binding  inter 
nationally,  but  the  Constitution  makes  treaties  a  part  of  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land  —  that  is,  a  part  of  our  own  munici 
pal  law.  A  treaty,  if  of  later  date,  and  in  conflict  with  a 
law  passed  by  Congress,  repeals  so  mucH  of  the  law  as  it 
conflicts  with;  but  an  unratified  protocol,  or  any  other  in 
ternational  agreement,  no  matter  by  what  name  it  is  called, 
not  submitted  to  the  Senate,  does  not  have  the  effect  of  a 
treaty,  as  that  term  is  defined  in  the  Constitution.  A 
protocol  is  binding  merely  on  the  Executive  who  makes  it, 
and,  as  has  been  well  said,  such  protocol  is  binding  on  the 
administration  in  a  moral  sense  only. 

Nevertheless  it  has  been  the  practice  to  make  so-called 
diplomatic  agreements  concerning  very  important  matters 
without  their  submission  to  the  Senate. 

For  instance,  the  agreement  of  1817,  concerning  the  naval 
forces  on  the  Great  Lakes,  was  considered  in  force  and  ob 
served  by  the  two  Governments  for  a  year  or  more  before 
it  was  submitted  to  the  Senate  at  all.  Horse  Shoe  Reef, 
in  Lake  Erie,  was  transferred  to  the  Government  by  a  mere 
exchange  of  notes  between  Lord  Palmerston  and  Mr. 
Lawrence,  our  Minister  to  Great  Britain;  and  I  might  refer 
to  a  long  list  of  arbitrations,  some  of  very  great  impor 
tance,  agreed  to  by  unratified  protocols.  The  very  impor 
tant  protocol  concluded  by  the  powers  after  the  Boxer 
troubles  in  China  was  not  sent  to  the  Senate.  Important 
agreements  are  often  made  under  the  name  of  modus  Vivendi 
without  submission  to  the  Senate. 

Very  little  comment  is  to  be  found  in  books  on  inter 
national  law  concerning  protocols  or  diplomatic  agreements. 


AGREEMENTS  BY  PROTOCOL  395 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Executive  has  the  right  to  enter 
into  a  protocol  preliminary  to  the  negotiation  of  a  treaty. 
This  is  a  common  practice.  We  have  such  protocols  pre 
liminary  to  treaties  of  peace.  As  to  the  claims  protocols, 
the  Executive  Department  has  taken  the  position  that  the 
President,  who  is  in  charge  of  our  foreign  relations,  has 
wide  discretion  in  settling  disputes  by  diplomacy;  and  that 
a  claims  protocol  is  in  the  nature  of  a  settlement  of  a  claim  of 
a  citizen  of  our  country  against  a  foreign  Government,  by 
diplomacy. 

The  term  "protocol,"  or  diplomatic  agreement,  or  modus 
Vivendi,  is  not  found  in  the  Constitution.  The  Constitution 
uses  only  one  term  in  describing  agreements  between  this 
Government  and  foreign  powers,  and  that  is  the  term 
"treaty";  and  every  agreement  between  the  United  States 
and  a  foreign  Government,  to  have  the  effect  of  a  treaty, 
to  be  a  part  of  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  must  be  rati 
fied  as  the  Constitution  prescribes,  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
Senate. 

When  Mr.  Root  entered  the  State  Department,  it  seems 
to  me  that  he  stopped  the  practice  very  largely  of  making 
diplomatic  agreements.  It  seemed  to  be  his  policy,  and  a 
very  wise  one,  to  seek,  rather  than  avoid,  consulting  the 
Senate.  I  know  that  under  his  administration  agreements 
were  made  in  the  form  of  a  treaty  and  sent  to  the  Senate 
which  other  administrations  would  consider  they  had  a  per 
fect  right  to  make  without  consulting  the  Senate.  It  will 
be  wise  for  future  Administrations  to  adhere  to  Mr.  Root's 
policy  in  this  respect. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

ARBITRATION 

DURING  the  year  1904,  there  was  a  great  general 
movement  all  over  the  world  in  the  direction  of  arbi 
tration  treaties.  Indeed,  so  general  did  it  become,  and  so 
universal  was  the  form  used,  that  it  became  known  as  the 
Mondel  or  world  treaty.  The  treaties  were  very  brief,  and 
merely  provided  that  differences  which  may  arise  of  a  legal 
nature  or  relating  to  the  interpretation  of  treaties  existing 
between  the  two  contracting  parties,  and  which  it  may  not 
have  been  possible  to  settle  by  diplomacy,  shall  be  referred 
to  the  permanent  court  of  arbitration  established  at  The 
Hague;  provided,  nevertheless,  that  they  do  not  affect  the 
vital  interests,  the  independence,  or  the  honor  of  the  two 
contracting  States,  and  do  not  concern  or  involve  the  in 
terests  of  third  States.  There  was  a  second  article  in  the 
treaty,  which  provided  that  in  each  case  a  special  agreement 
should  be  concluded  defining  clearly  the  matter  in  dispute, 
the  scope  of  the  powers  of  the  arbitrator,  the  periods  to  be 
fixed  for  the  formation  of  the  arbitral  tribunal,  and  the  sev 
eral  stages  of  the  procedure. 

President  Roosevelt  and  Secretary  Hay  were  very  much 
in  favor  of  these  treaties,  and  sent  to  the  Senate,  for  its 
ratification,  treaties  in  substantially  the  foregoing  form,  with 
France,  Portugal,  Great  Britain,  Switzerland,  Germany, 
Italy,  Spain,  Austria,  Sweden,  Norway,  and  Mexico.  The 
treaties  were  considered  with  great  care  by  the  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations.  We  all  favored  arbitration  in  theory, 

396 


ARBITRATION  397 

and  I  do  not  think  any  one  wanted  to  oppose  the  treaties; 
but  a  number  of  questions  confronted  us.  I  neither  have 
the  right  nor  do  I  expect  to  detail  what  has  taken  place  in 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations;  but  I  can  say  that  the 
subject  was  discussed  in  the  press,  whether  such  treaties 
would  not  compel  us  to  consider  as  matters  for  arbitration 
claims  against  the  States,  growing  out  of  the  Civil  War  and 
Reconstruction. 

In  the  judgment  of  some,  such  claims  were  proper  sub 
jects  of  arbitration  under  this  Mondel  form  of  treaty. 

President  Roosevelt,  who  was  following  closely  the  treaties 
in  the  Senate,  and  with  whom  I  had  talked  concerning  these 
objections,  wrote  me  a  letter,  which  he  marked  personal, 
but  which  appeared  in  the  afternoon  papers  almost  before 
the  letter  reached  me,  it  having  been  given  out  at  the  White 
House,  in  which  he  said: 

"January  10,  1905. 
"My  DEAR  SENATOR  CULLOM: 

"I  notice  in  connection  with  the  general  arbitration  treaties  now  be 
fore  the  Senate,  that  suggestions  have  been  made  to  the  effect  that 
under  them  it  might  be  possible  to  consider  as  matters  for  arbitration 
claims  against  certain  States  of  the  Union  in  reference  to  certain  State 
debts.  I  write  to  say,  what  of  course  you  personally  know,  that  under 
no  conceivable  circumstances  could  any  such  construction  of  the  treaty 
be  for  a  moment  entertained  by  any  President.  The  holders  of  State 
debts  take  them  with  full  knowledge  of  the  Constitutional  limitations 
upon  their  recovery  through  any  action  of  the  National  Government, 
and  must  rely  solely  on  State  credit.  Such  a  claim  against  a  State 
could  under  no  condition  be  submitted  by  the  general  Government  as  a 
matter  for  arbitration,  any  more  than  such  a  claim  against  a  county  or 
municipality  could  thus  be  submitted  for  arbitration.  The  objection  to 
the  proposed  amendment  on  the  subject  is  that  it  is  a  mere  matter 
of  surplusage,  and  that  it  is  very  undesirable,  when  the  form  of  these 
treaties  has  already  been  agreed  to  by  the  several  Powers  concerned,  need 
lessly  to  add  certain  definitions  which  affect  our  own  internal  polity 
only;  which  deal  with  the  matter  of  the  relation  of  the  Federal  Govern- 


398     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

merit  to  the  States  which  it  is  of  course  out  of  the  question  ever  to 
submit  to  the  arbitration  of  any  outside  tribunal;  and  which  it  is  cer 
tainly  absurd  and  probably  mischievous  to  treat  as  possible  to  be  raised 
by  the  President  or  by  any  foreign  power.  No  one  would  even  think  of 
such  a  matter  as  being  one  for  arbitration  or  for  any  diplomatic  nego 
tiation  whatever.  Moreover,  these  treaties  run  only  for  a  term  of  five 
years;  until  the  end  of  that  period  they  will  certainly  be  interpreted  in 
accordance  with  the  view  above  expressed. 

"Very  truly  yours, 

"(Signed)  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 
"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM,  U.  S.  SENATE." 

But  a  more  serious  question  was  met  when  we  came  to 
consider  the  second  article  of  the  treaty,  which  provided  that 
in  each  case  a  special  agreement  should  be  made  defining 
clearly  the  matter  in  dispute,  the  scope  and  powers  of  the 
arbitrators,  and  the  periods  to  be  fixed  for  the  formation  of 
the  arbitral  tribunal.  The  difficulty  confronting  us  was, 
whether  it  was  the  intention  to  submit  the  special  agree 
ments  referred  to  in  article  two  for  the  ratification  of  the 
Senate.  It  was  the  unanimous  opinion  that  these  special 
agreements  should  be  submitted  to  the  Senate. 

I  believe  that  as  the  treaties  were  drafted  it  would  be  the 
Constitutional  duty  of  the  President  to  have  each  special 
agreement  submitted  for  ratification,  because  the  article 
provided  that  "the  high  contracting  parties  shall  conclude 
such  special  agreement."  The  Senate  is  a  part  of  the  treaty- 
making  power,  and  would  be  included  in  the  term  "high  con 
tracting  parties."  But  the  wording  of  article  two  left  some 
doubt  as  to  the  intention  of  those  negotiating  the  treaty; 
and  then,  again,  it  might  have  been  claimed  that  article  one, 
agreeing  to  arbitrate  the  questions  therein  enumerated,  might 
be  construed  as  an  agreement  in  advance  on  the  part  of  the 
Senate,  to  give  to  the  Executive  the  general  power  to  make 
arbitration  agreements  without  reference  to  the  Senate.  Of 


ARBITRATION  399 

course,  the  Senate,  even  if  it  so  desired,  could  not  thus  dele 
gate  the  treaty-making  power  to  the  Executive  alone. 
(^There  was  so  much  difference  of  opinion  that  I  took  oc 
casion  to  submit  the  question  to  both  President  Roosevelt 
and  Secretary  Hay,  whether  it  was  the  intention  on  the  part 
of  the  executive  department  to  send  these  special  agree 
ments  to  the  Senate  for  ratification.  They  both  replied  that 
it  was  not;  that  one  of  the  purposes  of  the  Executive  in 
making  the  treaties  was  to  enable  the  Administration  to  go 
ahead  and  make  the  special  agreements  without  consulting 
the  Senate. 

Under  these  circumstances,  it  was  almost  the  unanimous 
judgment  of  the  Senate  that  the  treaties  should  be  amended 
by  striking  out  the  words  "special  agreement"  and  substi 
tuting  the  word  "treaty,"  a  Constitutional  term  about  which 
there  could  be  no  doubt.  I  considered  at  the  time  that  the 
declaration  and  agreement  contained  in  these  treaties  in 
favor  of  arbitration  were  just  as  strong,  just  as  broad,  and 
just  as  obligatory  with  the  proposed  amendment  as  without 
it.  i  It  was  an  agreement  on  the  part  of  the  President  and 
Senate  that  the  President  and  Senate,  the  treaty-making 
power,  would  submit  differences  to  arbitration. 

The  Senate  was  severely  criticised  at  the  time  for  being 
too  technical  and  standing  in  the  way  of  arbitration;  but  in 
my  judgment  it  was  not  a  trifling  question.  It  could  not 
be  put  aside.  Even  if  the  amendment  had  not  been  adopted, 
the  President,  if  he  followed  the  Constitution,  should  have 
submitted  these  special  agreements  to  the  Senate  for  rati 
fication;  but  he  took  the  positive  stand  that  he  would  not 
submit  them,  and  nothing  remained  for  the  Senate  to  do 
but  to  assert  and  uphold  its  rights  as  a  part  of  the  treaty- 
making  power,  and  adopt  the  amendment  to  which  I  have 
referred. 


400     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

I  do  not  think  I  violate  any  of  the  rules  of  etiquette  by 
quoting  here  President  Roosevelt's  letter  written  to  me 
after  he  had  learned,  through  the  press,  that  the  Senate  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations  had  amended  the  treaties. 

"WHITE  HOUSE,  WASHINGTON, 

"February  10,  1905. 
"Mr  DEAR  SENATOR  CULLOM: 

"I  learn  that  the  Senate  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  has  re 
ported  the  arbitration  treaties  to  the  Senate,  amending  them  by  substitut 
ing  for  the  word  "agreement"  in  the  second  article  the  word  "treaty." 
The  effect  of  the  amendment  is  to  make  it  no  longer  possible,  as  be 
tween  its  contracting  parties,  to  submit  any  matter  whatever  to  arbitra 
tion  without  first  obtaining  a  special  treaty  to  cover  the  case.  This  will 
represent  not  a  step  forward  but  a  step  backward.  If  the  word  "agree 
ment"  were  retained  it  will  be  possible  for  the  Department  of  State  to 
do  as,  for  instance,  it  has  already  done  under  The  Hague  treaty  in  the 
Pious  Fund  arbitration  case  with  Mexico,  and  submit  to  arbitration  such 
subordinate  matters  as  by  treaty  the  Senate  had  decided  could  be  left 
to  the  Executive  to  submit  under  a  jurisdiction  limited  by  the  general 
treaty  of  arbitration.  If  the  word  "treaty"  be  substituted  the  result 
is  that  every  such  agreement  must  be  submitted  to  the  Senate;  and  these 
general  arbitration  treaties  would  then  cease  to  be  such,  and  indeed  in 
their  amended  form  they  amount  to  a  specific  pronouncement  against  the 
whole  principle  of  a  general  arbitration  treaty. 

"The  Senate  has,  of  course,  the  absolute  right  to  reject  or  to  amend 
in  any  way  it  sees  fit  any  treaty  laid  before  it,  and  it  is  clearly  the 
duty  of  the  Senate  to  take  any  step  which,  in  the  exercise  of  its  best 
judgment,  it  deems  to  be  for  the  interest  of  the  Nation.  If,  however, 
in  the  judgment  of  the  President  a  given  amendment  nullifies  a  proposed 
treaty  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is  no  less  clearly  his  duty  to  refrain  from 
endeavoring  to  secure  a  ratification  by  the  other  contracting  power  or 
powers,  of  the  amended  treaty;  and  after  much  thought  I  have  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  I  ought  to  write  and  tell  you  that  such  is  my  judg 
ment  in  this  case. 

"As  amended,  we  would  nave  a  treaty  of  arbitration  which  in  effect 
will  do  nothing  but  recite  that  this  Government  will  when  it  deems  it 
wise  hereafter  enter  into  treaties  of  arbitration.  Inasmuch  as  we,  of 
course,  now  have  the  power  to  enter  into  any  treaties  of  arbitration, 


ARBITRATION  401 

and  inasmuch  as  to  pass  these  amended  treaties  does  not  in  the  smallest 
degree  facilitate  settlements  by  arbitration,  to  make  them  would  in  no 
way  further  the  cause  of  international  peace.  It  would  not,  in  my 
judgment,  be  wise  or  expedient  to  try  to  secure  the  assent  of  the  other 
contracting  powers  to  the  amended  treaties,  for  even  if  such  consent 
were  secured  we  would  still  remain  precisely  where  we  were  before,  save 
where  the  situation  may  be  changed  a  little  for  the  worse.  There  would 
not  even  be  the  slight  benefit  that  might  obtain  from  the  more  general 
statement  that  we  intend  hereafter,  when  we  can  come  to  an  agreement 
with  foreign  powers  as  to  what  shall  be  submitted,  to  enter  into  arbi 
tration  treaties;  for  we  have  already,  when  we  ratified  The  Hague 
treaty  with  the  various  signatory  powers,  solemnly  declared  such  to  be 
our  intention;  and  nothing  is  gained  by  reiterating  our  adherence  to 
the  principle,  while  refusing  to  provide  any  means  of  making  our  inten 
tion  effectual.  In  the  amended  form  the  treaties  contain  nothing  ex 
cept  such  expression  of  barren  intention,  and  indeed,  as  compared  with 
what  has  already  been  provided  in  The  Hague  arbitration  treaty,  they 
probably  represent  not  a  step  forward  but  a  slight  step  backward,  as 
regards  the  question  of  international  arbitration.  As  such  I  do  not  think 
they  should  receive  the  sanction  of  this  Government.  Personally  it  is 
not  my  opinion  that  this  Government  lacks  the  power  to  enter  into  gen 
eral  treaties  of  arbitration,  but  if  I  am  in  error,  and  if  this  Government 
has  no  power  to  enter  into  such  general  treaties,  then  it  seems  to  me 
that  it  is  better  not  to  attempt  to  make  them,  rather  than  to  make  the  at 
tempt  in  such  shape  that  they  will  accomplish  literally  nothing  what 
ever  when  made. 

"Sincerely  yours, 

"(Signed)  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 
"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM,  U.  S.  SENATE." 

This  letter  was  read  to  the  Senate,  and  notwithstanding 
the  positive  declaration  by  Mr.  Roosevelt  that  he  would  not 
ask  any  of  the  foreign  Governments  to  consent  to  the  amend 
ment  made  by  the  Senate,  the  treaties  were  amended  and 
ratified  by  the  Senate. 

I  told  the  President  in  advance  of  the  action  of  the  Senate 
what  would  be  done,  and  he  rather  curtly  remarked  that 

the  matter  was  closed,  and  that  he  would  not  ask  the  other 

26 


402     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

Governments  to  agree  to  the  treaties  as  amended.     And  no 
further  action  was  taken  on  the  treaties. 

When  Secretary  Root  entered  the  State  Department  he 
took  an  entirely  different  view  of  the  subject.  I  do  not 
know  whether  Mr.  Root  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  Senate 
was  right  in  insisting  on  what  it  considered  to  be  its  duty 
in  amending  the  treaties,  but  I  do  know  that  he  negotiated 
arbitration  treaties  with  Austria,  China,  Costa  Rica,  Den 
mark,  France,  Great  Britain,  Haiti,  Italy,  Japan,  Mexico, 
The  Netherlands,  Norway,  Paraguay,  Peru,  Portugal,  Sal 
vador,  Spain,  Sweden,  and  Switzerland,  every  one  of  which 
treaties  contained  the  stipulation  that  the  special  agreements 
referred  to  in  article  two  were  to  be  made  by  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  Senate.  These  treaties  were  promptly  ratified  and  are 
a  part  of  the  supreme  law  of  the  land  to-day. 

Secretary  Root  was  very  wise  in  negotiating  and  send 
ing  to  the  Senate  this  series  of  Mondel  or  world  treaties. 
All  the  Nations  of  the  world  were  agreeing  to  these  treaties 
among  themselves,  and  it  would  have  been  a  rather  remark 
able  condition  if  the  United  States,  of  all  the  great  Nations, 
should  have  remained  aloof.  I  do  not  believe  that  Mr.  Root 
had  any  difficulty  in  obtaining  the  consent  of  the  signatory 
powers  to  the  treaties,  with  the  stipulation  that  the  special 
agreement  should  come  to  the  Senate  for  ratification;  but 
for  some  reason  or  other,  at  the  time  when  the  first  treaties 
were  under  consideration,  President  Roosevelt,  as  indicated 
in  the  letter  which  I  have  quoted,  and  probably  more  par 
ticularly  Secretary  Hay,  were  both  very  much  incensed  at 
the  action  of  the  Senate,  and  permitted  the  first  treaties  to 
expire. 

This  general  movement  in  the  direction  of  arbitration  was 
one  of  the  most  important  events  of  the  beginning  of  the 


ARBITRATION  403 

twentieth  century.  The  importance  of  the  adoption  of  this 
principle  by  the  Nations  of  the  world  cannot  be  over 
estimated.  It  has  been  well  said  that  international  arbitra 
tion  is  the  application  of  law  and  of  judicial  methods  to  the 
determination  of  disputes  between  Nations,  and  that  this 
juristic  idea  in  the  settlement  of  international  disputes  is 
largely  an  outgrowth  of  the  international  relations,  the  new 
and  advanced  civilization  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

I  do  not  believe  the  time  will  ever  come  when  wars  will 
cease, —  the  United  States  obtained  its  independence  by  means 
of  revolution  and  war;  but  peace  and  arbitration  have  been 
advocated  by  the  great  majority  of  the  enlightened  states 
men  of  the  world.  There  were  many  great  wars  during  the 
nineteenth  century,  including  our  own  Civil  War,  the  great 
est,  the  bloodiest,  recorded  in  all  history ;  but  during  this  cen 
tury  arbitration  has  made  wonderful  strides.  In  the  same 
period  there  were  four  hundred  and  seventy-one  instances  of 
international  settlements  involving  the  application  of  the 
principle  of  international  arbitration.  Many  of  these  arbitra 
tions  were  of  the  greatest  importance;  and  I  remark  here 
that  in  the  number  of  arbitrations  and  the  importance  of  the 
questions  involved,  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  have 
unquestionably  led  the  way.  In  fact,  since  the  War  of  1812, 
every  subject  of  dispute  between  the  two  Nations,  which  it 
was  found  impossible  to  settle  by  diplomacy,  has  been  sub 
mitted  to  arbitration.  Only  within  a  few  years  the  Alaskan 
boundary  was  settled  by  arbitration,  and  within  the  past 
year  a  fisheries  dispute,  a  cause  of  embarrassment  since 
1818,  was  submitted  to  The  Hague  tribunal  and  a  decision 
rendered,  which,  though  not  entirely  satisfactory  to  the 
United  States,  we  accepted  as  the  final  settlement. 

We  have  uniformly  adopted  arbitration  as  a  means  of 
settlement  for  disputes  with  the  Central  and  South  Ameri- 


404     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

can  Republics.  With  Mexico  the  treaty  of  Guadalupe 
Hidalgo,  of  1848,  stipulates  that  future  disputes  between 
the  two  republics  shall  be  submitted  to  arbitration.  We 
have  a  general  arbitration  treaty  for  the  settlement  of 
pecuniary  claims  with  all  the  Central  and  South  American 
Republics.  At  the  first  Hague  Conference,  which  met  in 
1899,  a  general  arbitration  treaty  was  agreed  to.  It  was 
a  non-compulsory  arbitration,  and  at  the  time  represented 
the  farthest  steps  in  advance  in  the  direction  of  arbitration 
which  all  the  Nations  were  willing  to  take  together.  That 
treaty  was  perfected  at  the  second  Hague  Conference  of 
1907;  and,  in  addition,  a  series  of  treaties  were  agreed  to 
concerning  the  opening  of  hostilities,  the  laws  and  customs 
of  war  on  land,  the  rights  and  duties  of  neutrals,  submarine 
contact  mines,  bombardment  by  naval  forces,  the  right  of 
capture  in  naval  war,  neutral  powers  in  naval  war,  an  inter 
national  prize  court,  and  the  discharge  of  projectiles  from 
balloons,  and  the  Geneva  Convention  was  revised.  Aside 
from  the  prize  court  treaty,  concerning  which  there  were 
Constitutional  objections,  these  treaties  were  ratified  by  the 
Senate,  the  United  States  being  one  of  the  first  Nations  of 
the  world  to  take  this  step.  Unlike  the  first  Hague  Con 
ference,  the  South  American  Republics  participated  in  the 
second  Conference,  and  it  was  the  first  time  in  all  the  world's 
history  that  the  representatives  of  all  the  independent  Na 
tions  in  the  world  gathered  together  in  the  interest  of  peace 
and  agreed  on  certain  principles  which  should  guide  them 
in  the  conduct  of  war,  if  war  must  come. 

I  take  pride  in  the  fact  that  the  treaties  agreed  to  at  the 
first  Hague  Conference,  and  the  treaties  agreed  to  at  the 
second  Hague  Conference,  and  the  series  of  Mondel  treaties, 
were  reported  from  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 


ARBITRATION  405 

and  ratified  by  the  Senate  during  my  chairmanship  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 

The  last  step  to  date  in  the  interest  of  the  peaceful  settle 
ment  of  international  disputes  has  been  taken  by  President 
Taft  in  the  arbitration  treaties  between  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain  and  between  the  United  States  and 
France,  both  of  which  were  signed  by  the  representatives  of 
this  and  the  other  two  Governments  in  August,  1911.  The 
ban  of  secrecy  has  been  removed  from  these  documents,  and 
I  feel  at  liberty  to  make  brief  mention  of  them,  although, 
as  they  still  are  pending  in  the  Senate,  I  should  not  feel  dis 
posed  to  discuss  them  at  length.  The  treaties  mark  an 
advance  over  the  arbitration  treaties  of  1908  in  that  they 
bring  into  arbitration  a  much  wider  range  of  subjects  than 
is  covered  by  the  older  conventions.  In  the  latter,  questions 
of  "national  honor,"  "vital  interest,"  etc.,  were  excluded 
from  consideration,  whereas,  under  the  pending  agreements, 
"all  differences  which  are  justiciable  in  their  nature  by 
reason  of  being  susceptible  of  decision  by  the  application  of 
the  principles  of  law  and  equity,"  are  made  subject  to  arbi 
tration  under  the  rules  laid  down  in  the  documents. 

There  also  is  a  provision  granting  to  the  Commission 
created  by  the  treaties  the  right  to  determine  whether  any 
given  question  presented  to  it  may  be  considered  justiciable 
under  the  language  of  the  treaties.  This  latter  provision  is 
regarded  by  the  President  and  Secretary  Knox  as  highly  de 
sirable  in  the  interest  of  the  expedition  of  business,  but  it 
met  such  opposition  in  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 
that  its  elimination  from  the  treaties  was  recommended  to 
the  Senate.  The  objection  to  the  provision  is  based  upon 
the  theory  that  it  would  deprive  the  Senate  of  its  constitu 
tional  right  to  pass  upon  all  treaties.  I  have  not  accepted 


406     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

this  view,  because  I  do  not  believe  in  hampering  working 
bodies  when  such  a  course  can  be  avoided  without  doing  vio 
lence  to  the  fundamental  law  as  I  believe  in  this  case  it  can  be. 

With  this  provision  expunged,  the  Committee  is  largely 
favorable  to  the  treaties,  and  they  are  now  pending  in  the 
Senate.  It,  however,  has  become  evident  that  they  cannot 
be  speedily  acted  upon,  and  as  I  write,  in  the  closing  days 
of  the  special  session,  called  at  the  beginning  of  the  Sixty- 
second  Congress,  the  indications  are  strong  that  they  will  be 
compelled  to  go  over  to  the  regular  session  in  December  for 
final  consideration.  What  their  fate  then  may  be  no  one 
can  foretell. 

It  is  well  understood  that  if  these  treaties  should  be  rati- 
fied  they  will  be  followed  by  similar  agreements  with  the 
other  civilized  nations  of  the  world.  The  spirit  of  arbitra 
tion  has  taken  strong  hold  on  our  big-hearted  and  peace- 
loving  President,  and  I  am  confident  that  he  will  leave  no 
stone  unturned  to  promote  good  will  among  nations  as  he 
is  wont  to  do  among  men.  Whatever  differences  of  opinion 
there  may  be,  regarding  the  details  of  any  particular  nego 
tiation,  no  person  of  whatever  party  or  creed  can  doubt 
President  Taft's  splendid  patriotism  and  devotion  to  the 
highest  ideals  of  citizenship.  I  am  sure  that  these  treaties 
have  been  inspired  by  these  sentiments,  and,  being  honest 
and  benevolent  in  their  purpose,  the  principle  they  embody 
must  prevail  in  the  end. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

TITLES   AND   DECORATIONS   FROM    FOREIGN    POWERS 

IHE  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provides: 

"No  title  of  nobility  shall  be  granted  by  the  United  States,  and  no  per 
son  holding  any  office  of  profit  or  trust  under  them  shall,  without  the 
consent  of  Congress,  accept  of  any  present,  emolument,  office,  or  title  of 
any  kind  whatever  from  any  king,  prince,  or  foreign  State." 

When  I  became  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,  there  were  numerous  bills  pending,  and  numerous 
requests  submitted  through  the  State  Department,  for  au 
thority,  on  the  part  of  officers  of  the  United  States,  to  ac 
cept  gifts  and  decorations  from  foreign  Governments.  At 
first  I  was  disposed  to  consent  to  the  report  and  passage 
of  such  bills,  and  during  the  first  year  or  two  they  were  re 
ported  from  the  committee  from  time  to  time  and  passed 
in  the  Senate.  The  House  did  not  act  upon  the  individual 
bills,  but  a  so-called  "omnibus  bill"  was  passed  in  the  House 
containing  all  the  bills  that  previously  had  been  passed  by 
the  Senate,  and  in  addition  quite  a  number  of  House  bills. 
I  had  not  realized  until  then  how  extensive  the  practice  had 
become,  and  I  thereupon  determined  to  use  what  influence 
I  had  to  put  a  stop  to  it.  Since  then  but  two  decorative 
bills  of  an  exceptionally  meritorious  nature,  one  in  favor  of 
Captain  T.  deWitt  Wilcox,  and  one  in  favor  of  Admiral 
B.  H.  McCalla,  have  been  enacted  by  Congress. 

I  thoroughly  disapprove  of  the  practice,  and  wanted  to  put 
an  effectual  stop  to  it.  At  the  same  time  the  requests  came 

407 


408     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

pouring  in  from  session  to  session,  and  certain  Senators, 
both  on  the  committee  and  others  who  were  not  members 
of  it,  insisted  and  urged  that  favorable  action  be  taken  in 
behalf  of  officers  of  the  United  States  in  whom  they  were 
interested.  After  more  than  two  hundred  requests  had  ac 
cumulated,  I  determined  to  appoint  a  subcommittee  to  con 
sider  the  whole  matter  and  report  to  the  committee  such  cases 
as  were  meritorious,  or  to  adopt  a  general  rule  against  the 
whole  practice.  As  chairman  of  that  subcommittee,  I  ap 
pointed  Mr.  Root,  and  with  him  Mr.  Lodge,  Mr.  Carter, 
Mr.  Bacon,  and  Mr.  Stone.  The  subcommittee,  on  March 
10,  1910,  submitted  its  report,  which  was  adopted  by  the 
full  committee  and  submitted  to  the  Senate.  Besides  re 
viewing  at  considerable  length  the  reasons  for  legislation,  the 
report  included  the  following  salient  features : 

First,  the  existence  of  the  prohibition  in  the  Constitution 
indicates  that  the  presumption  is  against  the  acceptance  of 
the  present,  emolument,  office,  or  title.  A  habit  of  general 
and  indiscriminate  consent  by  Congress  upon  such  applica 
tions  would  tend  practically  to  nullify  the  Constitutional 
provision,  which  is  based  upon  an  apprehension,  not  without 
foundation,  that  our  officers  may  be  aff ected  in  the  perform 
ance  of  their  duties  by  the  desire  to  receive  such  recognition 
from  other  Governments.  A  strong  support  for  the  view 
that  the  practice  should  not  be  allowed  to  become  general  is 
to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  does  not  confer  decorations  or  titles,  or  —  unless  in 
very  exceptional  cases  —  make  presents  to  the  officers  of 
other  Governments.  The  report  then  recommended  that  the 
following  five  rules  be  observed : 

"1.  That  no  decoration  should  be  received  unless  possibly  when  it  is 
conferred  for  some  exceptional,  extraordinary,  and  highly  meritorious  act, 
justifying  beyond  dispute  a  special  mark  of  distinction. 


TITLES  AND  DECORATIONS  409 

"2.  That  no  presents  should  be  received  except  such  articles  as  are  ap 
propriate  for  souvenirs  and  marks  of  courtesy  and  appreciation,  and  hay 
ing  an  intrinsic  value  not  disproportionate  to  such  a  purpose. 

"8.  That  the  acceptance  of  presents  within  the  limitation  above  stated 
should  be  further  limited  to  cases  in  which  some  exceptional  service  or 
special  relation  justifying  the  mark  of  courtesy  exists  between  the  re 
cipient  and  the  Government  offering  the  present. 

"4.  That  no  offer  of  any  other  title  or  emolument  or  office  should  be 
considered. 

"5.  We  consider  that  membership  in  learned  societies,  even  though  the 
appointment  thereto  may  have  a  quasi  Governmental  origin,  should  not  be 
considered  as  coming  within  the  Constitutional  provision,  and  it  may  well 
be  that  as  to  certain  trifling  gifts,  such  as  photographs,  the  rule  of  de 
minimis  lex  non  curat  should  be  deemed  to  apply." 

I  agreed  to  the  report  of  the  subcommittee  and  agreed  to 
the  bill,  permitting  certain  officers  to  accept  the  presents 
tendered  to  them,  where  there  were  good  reasons  therefor; 
but  I  am  free  to  say  that  I  was  somewhat  disappointed  that 
the  subcommittee  had  not  reported  in  favor  of  abolishing 
the  practice  entirely,  instead  of  discriminating  between 
presents  and  decorations,  as  they  did. 

The  bill  passed  the  Senate  without  debate  and  without  ob 
jection.  It  went  to  the  House,  and  the  House  Committee 
on  Foreign  Affairs,  through  Mr.  Denby,  of  Michigan,  sub 
mitted  a  most  admirable  report,  which  was  far  more  in  line 
with  my  own  ideas  than  was  the  report  of  the  Senate  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations.  I  agree  with  the  conclusions 
arrived  at  by  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  so  thoroughly 
that  I  am  going  to  give  most  of  that  report  here : 

".  .  .  The  subcommittee  expresses  the  hope  that  this  adverse  dis 
position  of  these  bills,  which  contains  items  fairly  representative  of  the 
great  majority  of  the  requests  for  Congressional  sanction  for  the  ac 
ceptance  of  foreign  orders,  decorations,  or  presents,  by  officials  of  the 
United  States,  will  be  regarded  as  notice  to  officials  of  the  United  States 
that  this  committee  at  least,  and  it  is  hoped  all  future  committees  dealing 


410     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

with  this  subject-matter,  will  refuse  to  consider  such  requests,  except  as 
hereinafter  noted. 

"The  Committee  of  Foreign  Affairs  has  been  required  to  devote  much 
time  to  the  consideration  of  bills  to  grant  permission  to  accept  such 
gifts.  The  committee  has  in  the  past  very  generally  declined  to  recom 
mend  favorably  any  such  legislation,  except  in  the  case  of  decorations  of 
fered  to  American  citizens  by  official  or  quasi-official  scientific  associations 
for  eminent  scientific  achievements." 

Article  1,  section  9,  paragraph  8,  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  is  quoted,  and  the  report  proceeds : 

"The  Congress  has  been  frequently  importuned  since  the  adoption 
of  the  Constitution  to  grant  its  consent  for  the  acceptance  of  orders, 
decorations,  and  presents  offered  to  officials  of  our  Government,  fre 
quently  upon  pretexts  the  most  trivial  and  for  services  the  most  com 
monplace,  when  services  of  any  kind  were  rendered  at  all.  A  glance 
at  the  requests  now  on  file,  summarized  in  Calendar  No.  378,  which  ac 
companies  S.  7096,  will  show  that  the  offers  of  foreign  gifts,  decora 
tions,  etc.,  have  been  made  in  the  great  majority  of  cases  to  officials  for 
services  in  the  direct  line  of  their  duty,  and  which  in  themselves,  in  the 
majority  of  cases,  were  not  deserving  of  any  special  commendation.  Fol 
lowing  a  practice  which,  because  of  reciprocal  considerations,  probably 
operates  satisfactorily  between  foreign  powers,  the  Governments  of  the 
world  frequently  tender  to  our  officers  decorations  or  presents  upon  such 
occasions  as  the  first  visit  of  a  fleet  to  a  foreign  power,  or  the  presence 
of  individual  officers  representing  our  Government  at  reviews  and  pub 
lic  ceremonials,  and  to  our  diplomatic  officials  upon  the  termination  of 
their  missions,  or  upon  occasions  of  rejoicing,  jubilees  of  sovereigns, 
etc.  While  the  practice  of  exchanging  such  graceful  souvenirs  is 
not  unpleasing  among  the  nations  which  recognize  and  reciprocate  the 
courtesy,  it  is  entirely  inappropriate  that  officials  of  this  Government 
should  accept,  or  desire  to  accept,  such  presents. 

"The  prohibition  of  the  Constitution  appears  to  have  been  put  there 
out  of  a  well-founded  desire  to  safeguard  our  officials  from  the  insidious 
influence  of  a  natural  but  not  desirable  sense  of  obligation  toward  the 
powers  donor.  The  history  of  nations  abounds  with  instances  of  the  giv 
ing  of  rich  presents  to  retiring  ambassadors  and  ministers  upon  the 
conclusion  of  treaties  or  the  satisfactory  termination  of  negotiations. 


TITLES  AND  DECORATIONS  411 

There  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  danger  of  recognizing  that  the  agent  of 
one  Government  may  properly  be  compensated  by  another  to  which  he 
is  accredited.  Another  and  obvious  objection  to  permitting  our  officials 
to  receive  gifts  or  decorations  from  foreign  powers  is  that,  having  no 
orders  of  nobility  and  no  decorations  in  this  country,  and  not  recognizing 
the  propriety  of  offering  to  officials  of  other  powers,  we  can  in  no  way 
reciprocate.  It  is  beneath  the  dignity  of  the  American  Government  to 
receive,  through  its  representatives,  presents  for  which  it  can  make  no 
return.  The  Constitutional  prohibition  is,  in  the  opinion  of  the  subcom 
mittee,  a  wise  one,  to  which  Congress  should  very  seldom  permit  any 
exception. 

"Therefore  the  subcommittee  earnestly  hopes  that  the  Committee  may 
put  itself  on  record  so  unequivocally  in  this  instance  as  to  clearly  indi 
cate  that  it  will  not,  except  under  circumstances  the  most  unusual  and 
extraordinary,  grant  permission  to  any  official  of  the  Government  to  re 
ceive  such  presents. 

"To  that  end  the  subcommittee  further  recommends  that  this  report 
may,  by  resolution,  be  adopted  as  expressing  the  view  of  the  members  of 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  of  the  House  of  Representatives;  that 
this  report  may  be  printed,  and  that  a  copy  may  be  communicated  to  the 
Secretary  of  State. 

"(Signed)  EDWIN  DENBY, 
H.  W.  PALMER, 
H.  D.  FLOOD,  Subcommittee. 

"Adopted  by  the  Committee  of  Foreign  Affairs,  April  7,  1910. 

"FREDERIC  L.  DAVIS,  Clerk." 

I  have  no  doubt  that  these  two  reports,  first  the  report  of 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  of  the  Senate,  and  sec 
ond,  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  of  the 
House,  taken  together,  will  effectually  stop  the  application 
for  permission  to  accept  both  presents  and  decorations  from 
foreign  Governments.  Indeed,  I  do  not  think  that  the  Sec 
retary  of  State  will  again  consent  to  apply  to  Congress  in 
behalf  of  officers  who  have  been  tendered  presents  and  decora 
tions. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

ISLE  OF  PINES,  DANISH  WEST  INDIES,  AND  ALGECIRAS 

FOR  a  number  of  years  there  was  considerable  contro 
versy  over  the  ownership  of  the  Isle  of  Pines,  a  small 
island  separated  from  Cuba  by  about  thirty  miles  of  water, 
containing  1200  square  miles.  This  dot  of  land  was  not  of 
the  slightest  account  to  the  United  States,  so  far  as  I  could 
see;  but  after  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain,  a  number  of 
Americans  purchased  land  there  for  the  purpose  of  estab 
lishing  homes.  When  the  United  States  withdrew  from 
Cuba  and  the  Cuban  Republic  was  established,  and  the  flag 
of  Cuba  was  extended  over  the  Island  of  Pines,  those  Ameri 
can  residents  protested  and  insisted  that  the  island  belonged 
to  the  United  States.  They  had  considerable  ground  for 
this  contention,  as  Mr.  Meikeljohn,  when  Assistant  Secre 
tary  of  War,  had  written  a  number  of  letters  in  which  he 
stated  that  the  Isle  of  Pines  had  been  ceded  to  the  United 
States  by  Spain,  and  therefore  was  a  part  of  our  territory,  al 
though  attached  at  the  time  to  the  division  of  Cuba  for 
governmental  purposes. 

The  treaty  of  peace  provided  in  article  one  that  Spain 
relinquishes  all  claims  of  sovereignty  over,  and  title  to,  Cuba ; 
and  in  article  two,  that  Spain  cedes  to  the  United  States  the 
Island  of  Porto  Rico,  and  other  islands  under  Spanish 
sovereignty  in  the  West  Indies,  and  the  Island  of  Guam  in 
the  Marianas  or  Ladrones. 

A  strict  construction  of  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain 

412 


ISLE  OF  PINES  413 

would  probably  give  the  island  to  the  United  States  under 
article  two. 

Cuba,  however,  insisted  that  the  island  was  a  part  of  Cuban 
territory,  but  it  was  provided  in  article  six  of  the  Platt 
amendments  that  the  title  to  the  island  should  be  left  to 
future  adjustment  by  treaty. 

Cuba  granted  to  the  United  States  two  very  valuable 
coaling  stations,  and  the  United  States  on  its  part  agreed  to 
enter  into  a  treaty  by  which  we  should  relinquish  whatever 
title  we  might  have  to  the  Island  of  Pines  in  favor  of  Cuba. 

A  rather  interesting  incident  occurred  in  connection  with 
this  treaty  which  I  believe  I  violate  no  confidence  in  now  de 
tailing,  as  both  Presidents  have  retired  from  office.  Presi 
dent  Roosevelt  was  very  anxious  that  the  treaty  be  ratified; 
he  was  also  most  solicitous  that  we  should  retain  friendly 
relations  with  the  Republic  of  Cuba,  and  felt  that  the  island 
was  not  of  the  slighest  importance  to  the  United  States 
from  any  standpoint,  declaring  that  he  would  not  accept  it. 
I  was  at  the  White  House  one  day  when  the  treaty  was  be 
fore  the  committee,  and  he  showed  me  a  letter  written  to  him 
by  President  Palma,  of  Cuba,  and  my  recollection  is  that  he 
gave  me  a  copy  of  it  for  such  use  as  I  might  desire  to  make. 
Mr.  Palma  urged  in  that  letter  that  the  Senate  act  favorably 
on  the  treaty,  because  if  it  did  not  his  reelection  as  President 
of  the  Cuban  Republic  would  thereby  be  endangered. 

So  much  opposition  to  the  treaty  developed  in  the  Senate 
that  I  deemed  it  useless  to  endeavor  to  bring  it  to  a  vote ;  and 
really,  as  I  look  at  it  now,  there  is  very  little  use  for  the 
treaty  at  all,  as  Cuba  is  and  has  been  exercising  jurisdiction 
over  the  Isle  of  Pines.  Cuba  must  be  giving  the  island  a 
good  government  for  the  American  residents,  as  I  have 
heard  nothing  from  the  island  for  several  years. 


414     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

It  was  during  the  Fifty-seventh  Congress  that  the  treaty 
with  Denmark,  providing  for  the  purchase  by  the  United 
States  of  the  Danish  West  Indies,  consisting  of  the  Islands 
St.  Thomas,  St.  John,  and  St.  Croix,  came  before  the  com 
mittee.  I  reported  the  treaty  to  the  Senate  and  urged,  and 
finally  secured,  its  ratification. 

The  United  States  by  this  treaty  agreed  to  pay  five  mil 
lion  dollars  to  Denmark  for  the  islands. 

We  first  attempted  to  purchase  the  islands  in  1865,  dur 
ing  the  administration  of  President  Lincoln.  Secretary 
Seward  was  particularly  anxious  that  the  United  States 
should  acquire  them,  and  a  treaty  was  negotiated  and  agreed 
to  by  Denmark,  The  treaty  was  not  acted  upon  during  the 
administration  of  President  Johnson,  and  because  President 
Grant  was  particularly  anxious  for  its  ratification,  Charles 
Sumner,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 
(as  in  the  case  of  the  Santo  Domingo  treaty),  opposed  its 
ratification  by  the  Senate,  and  it  was  defeated. 

President  Grant  showed  a  far-sighted  policy  in  favoring 
the  acquisition  of  every  foot  of  territory  which  we  could 
secure  in  the  West  Indies.  The  Danish  islands  are  of  great 
importance  to  the  United  States  in  a  strategic  way,  whether 
the  strategy  be  military  or  commercial.  St.  Thomas  is  the 
natural  point  of  call  for  all  European  trade  bound  for  the 
West  Indies,  Central  America,  or  Northern  South  America. 
These  islands,  together  with  Porto  Rico,  occupy  the  north 
eastern  corner  of  the  Caribbean  Sea;  and  they  are  of  more 
importance  now  than  ever,  because  of  the  fact  that  we  are 
constructing  the  Isthmian  canal.  In  view  of  that  canal,  and 
the  European  settlements  in  South  America,  every  addi 
tional  acquisition  by  the  United  States  in  the  West  Indies  is 
invaluable.  Porto  Rico  is  difficult  of  defence.  The  harbors 
are  poor,  while  the  harbor  in  the  Island  of  St.  Thomas  can 


ISLE  OF  PINES  415 

be  made  one  of  the  very  best  in  the  West  Indies.  Our  own 
officers  who  investigated  the  subject  reported  that  the  Island 
of  St.  Thomas  possesses  all  the  natural  advantages  of  a  sec 
ond  Gibraltar. 

The  Danish  Parliament,  after  a  long  debate,  declined  to 
ratify  the  treaty  of  1901  which  had  been  ratified  by  the  Sen 
ate,  and  for  the  present  at  least  the  subject  is  in  abeyance. 

I  still  hope,  before  I  shall  retire  from  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations,  that  the  United  States  may  succeed  in 
purchasing  these  valuable  islands. 

During  the  Winter  of  1906  there  occurred  in  the  Senate 
a  very  interesting  debate  over  the  appointment  of  repre 
sentatives  of  the  United  States  to  participate  in  the  so-called 
Algeciras  Conference,  held  in  Algeciras  in  1905  to  consider 
conditions  in  Morocco.  No  action  was  taken  by  the  Senate, 
and  in  due  course  the  act  or  treaty  agreed  to  at  that  con 
ference  was  submitted  to  the  Senate  for  ratification. 

I  do  not  think  there  can  be  the  slightest  doubt  that  Presi- 
/  den  Roosevelt  had  full  authority  to  appoint  the  delegates  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States,  and  that  he  was  thoroughly 
justified  in  contending  that  it  was  not  only  the  right  but  the 
duty  of  the  United  States  to  participate  in  this  conference. 
The  action  of  the  President  in  accepting  the  invitation  to  the 
conference  and  appointing  the  delegates,  and  the  very  im 
portant  part  therein  which  he  took  personally,  in  addition  to 
the  interest  manifested  through  his  representatives,  very 
properly  received  the  commendation  of  the  people  of  this 
country  and  of  the  whole  European  world.  *^ 

The  Moroccan  Empire  was  one  of  the  earliest  and  most 
interesting  of  the  world's  Governments.  During  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century  Morocco  occupied  the  at 
tention  of  the  maritime  nations  of  the  civilized  world,  as  it 


416     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

was  the  home  of  the  Barbary  pirates  who  preyed  upon  the 
commerce  of  all  the  nations.  The  United  States  itself  paid 
tribute  for  the  purchase  of  immunity  from  these  pirates. 
One  of  our  earliest  treaties,  made  before  the  adoption  of  the 
Constitution  in  1787,  was  a  treaty  of  peace  and  friendship 
with  Morocco.  We  entered  into  several  treaties  with  Mo 
rocco  later,  and  joined  in  treaties  concerning  that  country 
in  1865  and  1880  with  Austria,  Belgium,  Spain,  France, 
Great  Britain,  Italy,  Portugal,  and  other  Nations. 

For  many  years  Great  Britain  and  France  have  claimed  to 
have  superior  rights  in  Morocco,  and  it  has  seemed  to  be  the 
desire  of  France  to  annex  it.  Germany  has  intervened,  and 
the  country  has  been  a  bone  of  contention  among  the  Euro 
pean  Nations.  In  1904  Great  Britain  and  France,  by  a 
secret  treaty,  agreed  that  France  should  have  the  dominat 
ing  control  in  Morocco,  and  that  Great  Britain  should  domi 
nate  in  Egypt.  Germany  opposed  the  French  Protectorate 
and  insisted  that  an  international  conference  of  the  powers 
should  be  called.  At  one  time  it  seemed  that  war  was  in 
evitable,  and  it  probably  was  averted  only  by  the  Algeciras 
Conference.  The  United  States  was  asked  to  participate, 
as  we  had  participated  in  the  conference  of  1880.  If  we 
had  not  accepted  the  invitation  there  would  have  been  no 
conference,  as  two  of  the  great  powers  had  served  notice  that 
all  nations  represented  at  the  1880  conference  must  partici 
pate  in  the  Algeciras  Conference,  or  they  would  withdraw. 
Our  participation  was  in  the  interest  of  averting  a  European 
war. 

The  General  Act  or  Treaty  agreed  to  at  that  conference 
was  a  lengthy  and  important  one.  Its  details  are  not  of  so 
much  importance,  as  our  delegates  signed  it  under  a  signif 
icant  reservation  that  we  would  not  assume  any  obligation 
or  responsibility  for  the  enforcement  of  the  Act. 


ISLE  OF  PINES  417 

When  it  came  to  the  Senate,  there  was  quite  a  contest  over 
its  ratification.  We  could  not  secure  its  endorsement  dur 
ing  the  session  which  closed  the  first  of  July,  1906,  but  we 
were  able  to  reach  an  agreement  that  it  should  be  voted  on 
in  committee  and  in  the  Senate  during  the  month  of  Decem 
ber  following. 

President  Roosevelt  was  very  much  concerned  about  its 
ratification,  and  on  June  26,  1906,  when  it  seemed  pretty 
certain  that  the  Senate  would  adjourn  without  acting  on  the 
general  Act,  he  wrote  me  this  quite  characteristic  letter: 

"WHITE  HOUSE,  WASHINGTON,  June  26,  1906. 
"Mr  DEAR  SENATOR  CULLOM: 

"Having  reference  to  the  letter  which  Secretary  Root  wrote  you  yes 
terday  about  the  Algeciras  Convention,  I  can  only  add  that  I  earnestly 
hope  this  matter  will  receive  favorable  report  from  the  committee  at 
this  session.  I  am  literally  unable  to  understand  how  any  human  being 
can  find  anything  whatever  to  object  to  in  this  treaty;  and  to  reject  it 
would  mean  that  for  the  first  time  since  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
this  Government  will  be  without  a  treaty  with  Morocco.  It  seems  in 
credible  that  there  should  be  a  serious  purpose  to  put  us  in  such  a  posi 
tion.  "Sincerely  yours, 

"(Signed)  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT." 

The  General  Act  would  probably  not  have  been  ratified 
by  the  Senate  had  we  not  agreed  on  the  form  of  the  resolu 
tion  of  ratification.  That  resolution  provided: 

"Resolved  further,  that  the  Senate,  as  a  part  of  this  act  of  ratification, 
understands  that  the  participation  of  the  United  States  in  the  Algeciras 
Conference  and  in  the  formation  and  adoption  of  the  general  Act  and 
Protocol  which  resulted  therefrom,  was  with  the  sole  purpose  of  preserv 
ing  and  increasing  its  commerce  in  Morocco,  the  protection  as  to  life, 
liberty,  and  property  of  its  citizens  residing  and  travelling  therein,  and 
of  aiding  by  its  friendly  offices  and  efforts  in  removing  friction  and 
controversy  which  seemed  to  menace  the  peace  between  powers  signatory 
with  the  United  States  to  the  treaty  of  1880,  all  of  which  are  on  terms 

of  amity  with  this  Government,  and  without  purpose  to  depart  from  the 

27 


418     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

traditional  American  foreign  policy  which  forbids  participation  by  the 
United  States  in  the  settlement  of  political  questions  which  are  entirely 
European  in  their  scope." 

After  this  form  of  resolution  had  been  agreed  to  by  those 
favoring  and  those  opposing  the  treaty,  I  showed  it  to  Presi 
dent  Roosevelt.  He  expressed  his  satisfaction  with  it,  and 
the  Act  was  ratified  by  the  Senate. 

I  have  endeavored  to  cover  only  a  very  few  of  the  more 
important  matters  which  have  come  before  the  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations  since  I  have  been  its  chairman.  The 
treaties  before  the  committee  have  embraced  almost  every 
subject  of  contract  between  two  independent  Nations.  Nu 
merous  treaties  involving  extradition,  boundaries,  naturali 
zation,  claims,  sanitation,  trade-marks,  consular  and  diplo 
matic  friendship,  and  commerce,  and  many  other  subjects, 
have  been  before  the  committee  and  have  been  acted  upon 
and  ratified  by  the  Senate.  During  the  period  of  which  I 
am  now  writing,  I  believe  that  we  have  ratified  treaties  with 
almost  every  independent  Nation  of  the  world.  The  many 
important  matters  now  pending,  or  of  more  recent  date,  I 
am  not  at  liberty  to  refer  to,  the  injunction  of  secrecy  not 
yet  having  been  removed. 

The  Foreign  Relations  Committee  will  continue  in  the 
future,  as  it  has  in  the  past,  one  of  the  Senate's  foremost 
committees. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 

CONGRESS   UNDER   THE   TAFT   ADMINISTRATION 

IT  had  been  my  intention  to  close  these  recollections  with 
the  beginning  of  the  Taft  Administration,  but  their 
publication  has  been  deferred  until  the  Administration  ex 
tended  so  far  that  it  seems  proper  to  bring  my  observations 
up  to  date.  I  am  especially  impelled  to  this  course  by  the 
fact  that  the  present  era  has  developed  a  very  marked  change 
in  the  character  of  the  Senate,  and,  to  a  limited  extent  at 
least,  in  the  trend  of  political  thought  in  the  country  at  large 
—  a  change  which  should  be  noted  in  any  permanent  writing 
dealing  with  the  period.  Still,  I  have  no  intention  of  enter 
ing  upon  a  detailed  consideration  of  men  or  of  conditions. 
My  only  purpose  is  to  make  brief  mention  of  these  condi 
tions  and  to  refer  in  very  general  terms  to  some  who  have 
given  direction  to  recent  public  affairs. 

Observers  of  public  events  and  students  of  political  ques 
tions  probably  were  given  their  first  insight  into  the  tendency 
of  the  times  through  the  resignation  from  the  Senate  of 
Honorable  John  C.  Spooner,  of  Wisconsin,  which  was  ten 
dered  March  30,  1907.  I  have  made  frequent  reference  to 
Mr.  Spooner's  connection  with  the  Senate,  and  I  do  not 
intend  to  say  more  of  him  here  than  that  he  stood  for  con 
servatism  arid  the  old  traditions.  Sensitive  to  a  degree  to 
the  promptings  of  his  conscience,  and  still  desirous  of  repre 
senting  the  sentiment  of  his  constituents,  apparently  he 
found  himself  embarrassed  by  the  growth  in  his  State  of 

419 


420     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

what,  without  intending  any  disrespect,  I  may  designate  as 
"La  Follette-ism." 

Gradually  Hon.  Robert  M.  La  Follette,  who  previously 
had  served  several  terms  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
had  been  forging  his  way  to  the  front  in  Wisconsin  politics 
until  in  1905  he  was  elected  to  serve  as  Mr.  Spooner's  col 
league  in  the  Senate.  He  stood  for  radicalism  in  the  Re 
publican  party  as  against  Mr.  Spooner's  conservatism;  he 
was  the  advocate  of  many  innovations  and  experiments, 
while  Mr.  Spooner  held  to  the  old  and  tried  forms  of  pro 
cedure  in  public  affairs.  Whether  Mr.  La  Follette  was  the 
leader  of  this  new  propaganda  or  the  follower  of  a  growing 
sentiment  in  the  State  does  not  matter  to  this  record.  It  is 
sufficient  to  know  that  apparently  Wisconsin  public  opinion 
did  not  support  Mr.  Spooner  to  a  sufficient  extent  to  justify 
a  man  of  his  conscientious  disposition  in  retaining  his  place 
as  the  representative  of  the  people  of  that  State  in  the 
highest  legislative  body  of  the  Nation.  Moreover,  splendid 
lawyer  that  he  was,  he  knew  that  he  could  find  much  more 
lucrative  employment  outside  the  halls  of  legislation,  and 
he  felt  the  need  of  making  adequate  provision  for  his  family. 
In  consequence  of  these  conditions,  he  left  the  Senate,  and 
thus  opened  the  way  for  the  more  rapid  promotion  in  that 
body  of  the  new  school  of  politics  for  which  his  colleague 
stood,  a  school  which,  while  it  has  found  some  exponents  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  is  not  comparatively  so  largely 
represented  there  as  in  the  Senate. 

The  La  Follette  group  is  designated  by  its  own  disciples 
as  "Progressivism,"  whereas  by  outsiders  it  is  generally 
referred  to  as  ''Insurgency."  Mr.  La  Follette  came  to  the 
Senate  with  the  Fifty-ninth  Congress,  and  no  sooner  had  he 
entered  that  body  than  he  began  to  propound  his  doctrines 
there.  At  first,  he  stood  alone,  but  natural  inclination  soon 


TAFT  ADMINISTRATION  421 

drew  to  him  such  of  the  older  Senators  as  the  late  Jonathan 
P.  Dolliver,  of  Iowa,  and  Moses  E.  Clapp,  of  Minnesota, 
both  of  them  men  of  splendid  attainments  and  of  high  moral 
character.  With  the  incoming  of  Mr.  Taft  as  President 
came  also  Albert  B.  Cummins,  of  Iowa,  Joseph  L.  Bristow, 
of  Kansas,  and  Coe  I.  Crawford,  of  South  Dakota,  all  of 
whom  joined  heartily  with  Mr.  La  Follette  in  his  efforts  to 
shape  legislation. 

During  the  Sixty-first  Congress,  the  tariff  law  was  revised. 
The  Dingley  Act  of  1897  had  grown  unpopular  in  some 
portions  of  the  country,  because  it  was  believed  that  under 
it  the  duties  were  not  equitably  distributed,  and  the  cam 
paign  of  1908  had  been  fought  upon  a  platform  declar 
ing  for  a  revision.  When,  therefore,  Congress  met  in 
March,  1909,  being  called  together  in  extraordinary  session 
by  President  Taft,  every  one  recognized  the  necessity  for 
entering  upon  this  work.  There  had  been  no  specific  dec 
laration  in  the  platform  as  to  the  character  of  the  revision. 
Some,  commonly  called  "stand-patters,"  contended  for  a 
readjustment  without  any  general  lowering  of  rates,  while 
others  held  out  stiffly  for  a  reduction  all  along  the  line.  The 
result  of  the  work  of  Congress  was  the  enactment  of  what 
is  known  as  the  Payne-Aldrich  Tariff  Law  of  1909,  the 
measure  taking  its  name  on  account  of  the  joint  efforts  in 
its  behalf  of  Honorable  Sereno  Payne,  of  New  York, 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  of  the 
House,  and  Honorable  Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  of  Rhode  Island, 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  of  the  Senate.  The 
Payne-Aldrich  law  is  a  Protective  measure,  as  it  was  in 
tended  to  be.  The  Progressives,  in  both  the  Senate  and 
House,  sought  at  every  step  to  reduce  the  schedules,  but 
generally  without  success.  In  this  effort,  they  were  sup 
ported  by  Democratic  Senators  and  Representatives,  but  the 


422     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

"Old  Guard"  controlled  such  a  pronounced  majority  in  both 
Houses  as  to  render  the  opposing  efforts  futile,  fierce 
though  they  were.  So  general  was  this  conflict  that  in  many 
matters  the  Progressives  soon  established  a  faction  of  their 
own.  There  were  many  skirmishes  all  along  the  line. 
Their  divergence  from  the  views  of  Regular  Republicanism 
was  indicated  not  on  the  tariff  alone,  but  on  many  other 
questions  of  public  policy  which  I  may  say  I  regard  as 
extremely  visionary  and  impracticable. 

The  controversy  also  covered  the  methods  of  procedure 
of  both  the  Senate  and  the  House,  and  the  fight  on  "Uncle" 
Joe  Cannon  as  Speaker,  or  on  "Cannonism,"  which  charac 
terized  the  last  session  of  the  Sixty-first  Congress,  was  one  of 
the  instances  of  this  difference  of  opinion  in  the  party.  In  a 
less  pronounced  manner  the  Progressives  also  have  shown 
an  inclination  to  antagonize  and  overturn  the  customs  of 
the  Senate.  They  feel  the  restraint  of  some  of  the  Senate's 
established  rules,  and,  together  with  the  radical  element 
which  has  been  introduced  on  the  Democratic  side  of  the 
Senate  Chamber,  they  manifest  evident  impatience  with 
these  regulations.  That  fine  old  term  "senatorial  courtesy" 
has  lost  much  of  its  meaning  as  a  result  of  the  brusque  and 
breezy  manner  of  the  time.  No  longer  is  it  said  that  the 
young  Senator  must  be  seen  rather  than  heard.  Indeed, 
while  formerly  the  spectacle  of  a  Senator  rising  to  make  a 
speech  before  the  close  of  his  second  year  in  the  Senate  was 
regarded  as  unusual,  it  recently  has  come  to  be  remarked 
upon  if  a  new  man  remains  in  his  seat  for  two  months  before 
undertaking  to  enlighten  the  Senate  as  to  its  duties  towards 
itself  and  the  world. 

I  am  not  undertaking  here  to  pronounce  against  these  in 
novations,  but  merely  to  record  facts.  I  have  shown  my 
advocacy  of  proper  railroad  legislation  and  of  other  progres- 


TAFT  ADMINISTRATION  423 

sive  legislation  which  commended  itself  to  my  judgment. 
However,  I  am  classed  as  a  Regular  and  desire  to  be.  My 
votes  have  been  with  the  party  organization.  I  have  made 
it  a  rule  throughout  my  political  career  to  stand  for  the 
general  principles  of  the  party  as  enunciated  by  its  author 
ized  bodies ;  but  while  that  is  my  course,  I  do  not  pretend  to 
say  that  that  organization  always  represents  all  that  is  good 
and  best  for  the  country  or  that  in  many  cases  the  Progres 
sives  and  Insurgents  may  not  be  nearer  right  than  the  Reg 
ulars.  In  the  main,  however,  I  have  found  that  the  best 
results  are  obtained  through  following  the  course  indicated 
by  the  united  wisdom  of  the  party.  My  plan  has  been  to 
exert  my  influence  in  the  direction  of  careful  and  conserva 
tive  progression  within  established  party  lines,  and  in  such  a 
Bourse  do  I  believe  that  the  Republican  party  can  best  in 
sure  its  perpetuity. 

Senator  Spooner's  resignation  from  the  Senate  was  fol 
lowed  by  the  refusal  of  Senators  Hale  and  Aldrich  to  stand 
for  reelection  in  1911.  The  retirement  of  those  three  dis 
tinguished  leaders  constitutes  the  best  index  of  the  tendency 
of  the  times.  Men  of  experience,  dignity,  and  conservatism, 
they  voluntarily  gave  way  before  the  press  of  public  exi 
gency.  True,  they  consulted  their  own  inclinations,  but  I 
always  have  thought  that  if  the  old  conditions  had  continued 
in  the  Senate  they  would  have  elected  to  remain  there. 
Their  seats  are  filled  by  good  and  true  men,  but  by  men  of 
very  different  characteristics,  unless  an  exception  may  be 
made  in  Senator  Aldrich's  case,  whose  successor,  Henry  F. 
Lippitt,  appears  to  be  a  man  much  like  his  predecessor. 
Whether  the  change  will  be  beneficial  or  otherwise  remains 
to  be  seen,  but  my  optimism  is  so  great  I  do  not  believe  that 
anything  but  good  can  come  permanently  to  this  great  coun 
try  of  ours.  I  confess  to  a  liking  for  the  old  methods. 


424     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

This  general  change  of  public  sentiment  has  brought  into 
the  Senate  not  only  Mr.  La  Follette,  Mr.  Bristow,  Mr. 
Clapp,  Mr.  Cummins,  and  Mr.  Crawford,  but  also  a  number 
of  other  men  of  similar  views,  so  that  within  six  or  seven 
years  the  progressive  group  has  increased  to  thirteen  mem 
bers,  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  membership  of  the  Senate. 

I  shall  not  undertake  to  mention  all  of  those  contained  in 
this  little  body,  but  I  have  been  so  impressed  with  the  bear 
ing  of  Senator  William  E.  Borah,  of  Idaho,  and  Senator 
Joseph  M.  Dixon,  of  Montana,  that  I  do  not  feel  justified  in 
passing  them  by  unnoticed.  They  are  both  very  able  men 
and  men  of  high  purpose.  They  do  not  stand  with  this 
group  all  the  time ;  neither  goes  where  his  convictions  do  not 
lead. 

Moreover,  these  Republicans  of  supposedly  advanced 
thought  have  found  their  counterpart  in  a  number  of  new 
Senators  who  have  taken  their  seats  on  the  Democratic  side. 
The  Democrats,  as  well  as  the  Republicans,  have  their  Pro 
gressive,  or  Radical,  element,  and  while  the  Democratic  rep 
resentatives  of  this  thought  differ  from  those  on  the  Repub 
lican  side  on  the  subject  of  Protection,  they  have  cooperated 
in  the  interest  of  what  they  consider  a  closer  approach  to 
the  demands  of  the  people  on  other  subjects  of  legislation. 
On  the  tariff  schedules,  which  have  been  presented  during 
the  special  session  of  the  Sixty-second  Congress  now  com 
ing  to  a  close,  they  also  have  stood  together,  forming  what 
some  have  been  pleased  to  christen  the  "Unholy  Alli 
ance."  Both  Republicans  and  Democrats  of  the  radical 
type  are  contending  for  a  lower  tariff,  but  this  one  impor 
tant  difference  is  noticeable:  while  there  is  a  tendency  on 
the  Democratic  side  toward  free  trade,  the  Republican  mem 
bers  of  the  alliance  hold  out  for  the  protective  principle. 

It  is  pleasant  to  me  to  be  able  to  record  that  while  a  sum- 


TAFT  ADMINISTRATION  425 

cient  number  of  new  men  have  come  into  the  Senate  to  cause 
a  modification  of  its  general  appearance  and  apparent  pur 
poses,  there  still  are  enough  representatives  of  the  old  ele 
ment  to  cause  it  to  retain  its  distinctive  character  as  the  most 
conservative  deliberative  body  in  this  country.  In  addition 
to  the  new  men,  such  capable  legislators  remain  as  Lodge 
and  Crane,  of  Massachusetts,  Brandagee,  of  Connecticut, 
Burton,  of  Ohio,  Jones,  of  Washington,  Root,  of  New  York, 
Gallinger  and  Burnham,  of  New  Hampshire,  Heyburn,  of 
Idaho,  Penrose  and  Oliver,  of  Pennsylvania,  Perkins,  of  Cal 
ifornia,  Smoot  and  Sutherland,  of  Utah,  Clark  and  Warren, 
of  Wyoming,  Dillingham  and  Page,  of  Vermont,  Wetmore, 
of  Rhode  Island,  Curtis,  of  Kansas,  McCumber,  of  North 
Dakota,  Gamble,  of  South  Dakota,  William  Alden  Smith 
and  Charles  E.  Townsend,  of  Michigan,  Bradley,  of  Ken 
tucky,  and  others,  all  Republicans,  while  among  the  old- 
time  Democrats  should  be  mentioned  such  stanch  and  true 
men  as  Martin,  of  Virginia,  Bacon,  of  Georgia,  Bailey  and 
Culberson,  of  Texas,  Taylor,  of  Tennessee,  Shively,  of  In 
diana,  Tillman,  of  South  Carolina,  Fletcher,  of  Florida,  Fos 
ter,  of  Louisiana,  Johnston  and  Bankhead,  of  Alabama, 
Stone,  of  Missouri,  Clarke,  of  Arkansas,  Newlands,  of  Ne 
vada,  and  still  others  who,  though  their  names  may  not  be 
mentioned,  all  command  the  high  regard  of  their  colleagues. 
The  question  is  often  asked,  "Who  has  succeeded  Aldrich 
as  leader  of  the  Senate?"  No  one.  Practically,  there  are 
three  parties  in  the  Senate,  consisting  of  thirty-seven  Reg 
ular  Republicans,  forty-one  Democrats,  and  thirteen  Insur 
gent  Republicans.  In  caucus,  the  Insurgents  act  with  the 
Regulars,  but  in  legislation,  they  more  frequently  line  up 
with  the  Democrats.  The  consequence  is  that  no  party  is 
in  control,  and  therefore  that  no  party  can  dictate  the  course 
of  leadership.  Under  such  circumstances,  real  leadership 


426     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

is  out  of  the  question.  Senator  Penrose  succeeds  Senator 
Aldrich  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Finance,  and  is 
proving  thoroughly  competent  for  his  work  in  that  capacity. 
If  emergency  should  arise  throwing  the  direction  of  affairs 
into  the  hands  of  the  Republican  party,  he  might  also  suc 
ceed  the  Rhode  Island  Senator  to  the  leadership  of  the  Re 
publican  forces,  but  until  such  emergency  presents  itself,  no 
one  can  see  whether  that  position  would  fall  to  him  or  to 
some  other  Republican.  Leaders  are  born,  not  made. 
Leadership  is  not  a  matter  of  selection,  but  of  fitness.  \ 

Up  to  the  present  writing  (August,  1911),  President  Taft 
has  been  in  office  almost  two  and  a  half  years,  and  while, 
like  all  Presidents,  he  has  been  criticised,  I  am  confident  that 
in  the  end  the  first  half  of  his  administration  will  receive 
the  approval  of  the  historian.  Personally,  no  more  popular 
man  ever  occupied  the  office  of  Chief  Executive,  and  his  pop 
ularity  is  due  to  his  honesty  of  purpose  and  his  love  for  his 
fellow  man.  His  administration  has  witnessed  such  a  prose 
cution  of  the  unlawful  trusts  as  never  before  has  been 
known,  and  the  President  himself  has  been  engaged  in  a 
constant  endeavor  for  legislation  which  would  equalize  the 
benefits  of  American  citizenship,  relieve  the  distresses  of  the 
less  fortunate,  and  put  a  stop  to  graft,  wherever  found. 
Under  his  direction,  the  Interstate  Commerce  Law  has  been 
vastly  improved,  postal  savings  banks  have  been  established, 
and  the  conservation  of  our  natural  resources  has  been  placed 
upon  a  safe  and  sane  basis.  He  has  pressed  Reciprocity 
and  Arbitration  with  other  Nations,  and  he  has  established 
such  an  era  of  good  fellowship  among  public  men  of  all  par 
ties  and  beliefs  as  seldom  has  been  known  in  our  history. 
If  the  remainder  of  his  administration  proves  as  successful 
as  that  which  has  passed,  he  will  deserve,  as  I  believe  he  will 


TAFT  ADMINISTRATION  427 

receive,  the  endorsement  of  the  people  through  an  election 
to  a  second  term. 

The  present  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate  is  Hon.  James 
Schoolcraft  Sherman,  who  was  elected  Vice-President  on  the 
national  ticket  of  1908  with  President  Taft.  Mr.  Sherman 
brings  to  this  office  an  experience  of  twenty  years  as  a  mem 
ber  of  the  House  of  Representatives  from  the  Utica 
district,  much  of  which  time  he  was  a  member  of  the 
Committee  on  Rules.  He  is  an  accomplished  parliamen 
tarian,  a  fact  which  taken  in  connection  with  his  genial  dis 
position,  his  kindness  of  heart  and,  above  all,  his  love  of 
justice,  renders  him  one  of  the  most  acceptable  presiding 
officers  that  the  Senate  ever  has  had.  He  has  held  his  office 
during  all  of  the  regular  session  of  the  Sixty-first  Congress 
and  has  been  constantly  in  his  seat  during  the  special  session 
of  the  Sixty-second  Congress,  and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  in  so 
brief  a  time  no  man  ever  has  more  thoroughly  endeared  him 
self  to  members  of  the  Senate  of  whatever  party  or  faction. 
Occasionally,  of  course,  as  is  the  case  with  all  presiding  offi 
cers,  his  decisions  are  challenged;  but  I  believe  he  has  been 
uniformly  sustained;  and  even  such  proceedings  are  stripped 
of  all  appearance  of  rancor  through  his  kindness  of  manner 
and  his  evident  conviction.  He  is  a  fit  successor  of  Hobart 
and  Fairbanks. 


CHAPTER  XXXII 

LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL:  LINCOLN  LIBRARY 

THE  name  of  Springfield  will  forever  be  immortalized 
as  the  home  and  burial-place  of  Abraham  Lincoln. 
As  the  hundredth  anniversary  of  his  birth  approached,  it 
was  determined  to  hold  a  great  celebration,  and  it  was  gen 
erally  agreed  that  Springfield  was  the  fitting  and  proper 
place  in  which  to  hold  it. 

In  1907  the  Legislature  of  Illinois  passed  a  joint  resolu 
tion  providing: 

"Whereas,  the  one  hundredth  anniversary  of  the  birth  of  Abraham  Lin 
coln  will  occur  on  the  twelfth  day  of  February,  1909;  and, 

"Whereas,  it  is  fitting  and  proper  that  the  State  of  Illinois  should  cele 
brate  the  anniversary  of  the  birth  of  this  greatest  of  all  American  states 
men;  therefore,  be  it 

"Resolved,  by  the  Senate  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  concurring  therein,  that  the  one  hundredth  anniversary  of  the 
birth  of  Abraham  Lincoln  be  celebrated  in  the  City  of  Springfield,  on  the 
twelfth  day  of  February,  1909,  and,  be  it  further 

"Resolved,  that  the  Governor  is  hereby  authorized  and  empowered  to 
appoint  a  commission  of  fifteen  representative  citizens  of  this  State  to 
have  charge  of  all  arrangements  for  such  celebration." 

The  Governor  thereupon  appointed  fifteen  of  the  most 
distinguished  citizens  of  Springfield  as  the  State  Centennial 
Commission  to  have  charge  of  the  celebration. 

It  was  determined  that  the  celebration  should  not  be  a 
local  one,  but  should  be  more  in  the  nature  of  a  State  cele 
bration,  and  that  it  would  be  well  to  incorporate  it  under  the 

428 


LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL  429 

name  of  "The  Lincoln  Centennial  Association."  The  orig 
inal  incorporators  were: 

The  Hon.  Melville  W.  Fuller,  Chief  Justice  of  the  United 
States;  the  Hon.  Shelby  M.  Cullom,  United  States  Senator; 
the  Hon.  Albert  J.  Hopkins,  United  States  Senator;  the 
Hon.  Joseph  G.  Cannon,  Speaker  of  the  National  House  of 
Representatives;  the  Hon.  Adlai  E.  Stevenson;  the  Hon. 
Charles  S.  Deneen,  Governor  of  Illinois;  the  Hon.  John  P. 
Hand,  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of 
Illinois;  the  Hon.  J.  Otis  Humphrey,  Judge  of  the  United 
States  District  Court ;  the  Hon.  James  A.  Rose,  Secretary  of 
State  of  Illinois;  the  Hon.  Ben.  F.  Caldwell,  Member  of 
Congress;  the  Hon.  Richard  Yates;  Melville  E.  Stone,  Esq.; 
Horace  White,  Esq.;  John  W.  Bunn,  Esq.;  and  Dr.  Wil 
liam  Jayne. 

I  was  requested  to  secure  speakers  of  national  reputation, 
and  it  at  once  occurred  to  me  that  I  would  invite  the  Ambas 
sadors  of  France  and  Great  Britain,  and  Senator  J.  P.  Dol- 
liver,  to  visit  Springfield,  on  February  12,  1909,  and  deliver 
addresses.  These  distinguished  gentlemen  at  once  accepted 
the  invitation  which  I  extended  them  on  behalf  of  the  Gover 
nor  and  the  committee.  Later,  the  Hon.  William  Jennings 
Bryan  was  invited  to  be  present  also  and  deliver  an  address, 
which  invitation  he  accepted. 

The  memorial  exercises  celebrating  the  hundredth  anniver 
sary  of  Lincoln's  birth  were  held  under  the  direction  of  the 
State  Centennial  Commission,  appointed  by  the  Governor, 
working  in  conjunction  with  the  Lincoln  Centennial  Associa 
tion.  There  were  a  number  of  distinct  events,  but  the  most 
important  were  the  great  memorial  exercises  held  in  the  State 
Armory,  at  which  addresses  were  made  by  Ambassadors  Jus- 
serand  and  Bryce,  and  by  Senator  Dolliver  and  Mr.  Bryan, 
and  a  banquet  served  to  eight  hundred  guests.  The  celebra- 


430     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

tion  was  in  every  way  a  great  success,  largely  due  to  the  ef 
forts  of  Judge  Humphrey. 

It  was  quite  an  event  in  the  history  of  Springfield,  as  it 
was  the  first  time,  so  far  as  I  know,  that  the  Ambassadors  of 
two  great  Nations  visited  Springfield. 

I  regretted  very  much  that  I  was  so  engaged  in  matters 
pertaining  to  my  official  duties  in  Washington  that  it  seemed 
impossible  for  me  to  be  present.  I  was  requested  to  write 
something  which  could  be  read  at  the  banquet,  and  so  I  ad 
dressed  to  Judge  Humphrey  the  following  letter: 

"WASHINGTON,  D.  C., 

February  6t  1909. 
"HoN.  J.  OTIS  HUMPHREY, 

PRESIDENT  LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL  ASSOCIATION, 

SPRINGFIELD,  ILLINOIS. 
"My  DEAR  JUDGE  : 

"It  is  a  matter  of  sincere  regret  to  me  that  I  am  unable  to  be  present 
at  your  great  anniversary  celebration  of  the  birth  of  the  immortal  Lin 
coln,  and  to  welcome  to  my  home  city  the  Ambassadors  of  Great  Britain 
and  France  and  the  distinguished  guests  who  are  to  be  with  you. 

"Abraham  Lincoln,  greatest  of  Americans,  greatest  of  men,  emanci 
pator,  martyr,  his  service  to  his  country  has  not  been  equalled  by  any 
American  citizen,  not  even  by  Washington.  His  name  and  life  have 
been  an  inspiration  to  me  from  my  earliest  recollection. 

"On  this  one  hundredth  anniversary  of  his  birth,  the  people,  without 
regard  to  creed,  color,  condition,  or  section,  in  all  parts  of  this  Union 
which  he  saved,  are  striving  to  do  honor  to  his  memory.  No  American 
has  ever  before  received  such  deserved  universal  praise.  Not  only  in 
his  own  country,  but  throughout  the  civilized  world,  Abraham  Lincoln 
is  regarded  as  one  of  the  few,  the  very  few,  truly  great  men  in  his 
tory.  His  memory  is  as  fresh  to-day  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the 
people  as  it  was  forty  years  ago,  and  the  passing  years  only  add  to  his 
fame  and  serve  to  give  us  a  truer  conception  of  his  noble  character. 
The  events  of  his  life,  his  words  of  wisdom,  have  been  gathered  together 
in  countless  volumes  to  be  treasured  up  and  handed  down  to  generations 
yet  to  come. 

"I  knew  him  intimately  in  Springfield;  I  heard  him  utter  his  simple 


LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL  431 

farewell  to  his  friends  and  neighbors  when  he  departed  to  assume  a  task 
greater  than  any  President  had  been  called  upon  to  assume  in  our  his 
tory;  it  was  my  sad  duty  to  accompany  his  mortal  remains  from  the 
capital  of  the  Nation  to  the  capital  of  Illinois;  and  as  I  gazed  upon  his 
face  the  last  time,  I  thanked  God  it  had  been  my  privilege  to  know 
him  as  a  friend;  and  I  felt  then,  as  I  more  fully  realize  now,  that  the 
good  he  had  done  would  live  through  all  the  ages  to  bless  the  world. 

"Springfield,  his  only  real  home,  the  scene  of  his  great  political  triumph, 
was  his  fitting  resting-place.  In  the  midst  of  this  great  continent  his 
dust  shall  rest  a  sacred  treasure  to  myriads  who  shall  pilgrim  to  his  shrine 
to  kindle  anew  their  zeal  and  patriotism. 

"Again  expressing  regret  that  I  can  not  be  with  you  to  take  part  in 
honoring  the  memory  of  our  greatest  President,  on  the  one  hundredth 
anniversary  of  his  birth,  and  feeling  sure  that  the  Springfield  celebra 
tion  will  be  the  most  notable  of  all,  as  it  should  be,  I  remain 

"Sincerely  yours, 

"(Signed)  S.  M.  CULLOM." 

Of  all  the  notable  celebrations  held  on  the  one  hundredth 
anniversary  of  the  birth  of  Lincoln  in  every  part  of  the 
United  States,  the  Springfield  observance  was  the  most 
dignified  and  impressive;  and  it  was  determined  that  on 
Lincoln's  birthday  each  year,  under  the  auspices  of  the  Lin 
coln  Centennial  Association,  fitting  memorial  exercises 
should  take  place  in  Springfield,  to  which  guests  and  speak 
ers  of  national  and  international  renown,  from  all  parts  of 
the  United  States,  should  be  invited. 

Springfield  has  a  great  public  library,  called  the  "Lincoln 
Library,"  toward  which  Andrew  Carnegie  very  generously 
contributed  seventy-five  thousand  dollars.  I  took  consid 
erable  interest  in  the  Springfield  Library,  and  I  did  what  I 
could  to  prevail  upon  Mr.  Carnegie  to  make  as  generous  a 
contribution  as  he  would  toward  the  project.  I  remember 
that  I  wrote  him  a  letter  on  the  subject. 

It  was  at  first  proposed  by  the  Springfield  people  to 
name  the  Library  "The  Lincoln-Carnegie  Memorial  Li- 


432     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

brary";  but  after  Mr.  Carnegie  had  made  his  contribution, 
through  his  secretary  he  informed  the  Rev.  E.  S.  Walker,  of 
Springfield,  who  carried  on  the  correspondence  with  him,  that 
he  would  consider  it  a  desecration  to  have  any  name  linked 
with  that  of  Lincoln.  "He  trusts  that  the  library  will  be 
known  as  the  'Lincoln  Library,'  not  the  'Lincoln  Memorial 
Library,'  as  Lincoln  needs  no  memorial,  being  one  of  the 
dozen  supremely  great  rulers  of  men  the  world  has  ever 


seen." 


The  Library  was  completed  in  1904,  and  I  was  invited  to 
deliver  the  dedicatory  address,  which  invitation  I  was  very 
glad  to  accept.  It  was  an  interesting  occasion,  held  in  the 
main  room  of  the  library  building,  which  was  crowded  with 
the  very  best  people  of  the  city.  I  give  a  few  extracts  from 
the  speech  I  delivered  that  evening: 

"MR.  CHAIRMAN  :  It  was  a  great  pleasure  to  me  to  be  invited  by  your 
library  board  to  participate  in  these  exercises  attending  the  opening  of 
this  splendid  library  building. 

"I  can  not  resist  on  this  occasion  the  inclination  to  say  a  few  words  in 
reference  to  Springfield  and  my  early  relations  to  it. 

"Old  historic  Springfield!  Here  have  taken  place  many  of  the  most 
important  events  in  the  history  of  Illinois.  Springfield  has  been  the 
centre  of  the  political  struggles  of  both  parties  since  it  has  been  the 
capital  of  the  State.  Many  of  the  great  statesmen  of  Illinois  have  oc 
cupied  seats  in  the  legislative  hall  in  Springfield.  Here  were  mobilized 
during  the  Civil  War  the  thousands  of  troops  who  went  forth  to  do  and 
die  for  the  Union.  Here  the  greatest  General  of  the  age  received  his 
first  command.  Here  Lincoln  and  Douglas  met,  and  from  here  Lin 
coln  went  forth  to  assume  a  task  greater  than  any  President  has  been 
called  upon  to  undertake  in  all  our  history. 

"Springfield  is  endeared  to  me  by  all  the  sacred  memories  of  friend 
ship,  family,  and  home. 

"I  came  here  fifty  years  ago.  In  Springfield  I  received  my  legal  edu 
cation,  was  admitted  to  the  Bar,  and  in  your  old  courthouse  here  I 
practised  my  profession.  In  Springfield  I  married  and  reared  my  family, 
and  here  my  children  are  laid  in  their  final  resting-place. 


LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL  433 

"Those  early  days  of  my  residence  here  are  among  the  happiest  of 
my  life.  Official  duties  have  necessitated  my  absence  a  great  part  of 
the  time  for  the  past  twenty  years,  but  my  heart  lingers  with  it,  and  the 
ties  which  made  those  early  days  so  happy  will  never  be  broken  so  long 
as  I  shall  live." 

After  giving  a  history  of  the  library  and  referring  to  the 
generosity  of  Mr.  Carnegie,  I  continued: 

"This  is  a  material  age.  Carnegie,  the  great  captain  of  industry,  is 
a  typical  representative  of  the  leaders  of  this  age.  It  is  well  worth 
our  while  to  stop  to  consider  why  he  should  devote  a  part  of  his  great 
wealth  to  the  founding  of  public  libraries. 

"Andrew  Carnegie  was  a  poor  boy,  enjoying  none  of  the  advantages 
and  opportunities  which  are  afforded  by  a  good  library.  He  missed  in 
his  early  life  the  opportunity  for  culture  which  is  now  obtained  through 
the  facilities  supplied  by  libraries  in  the  towns  and  cities.  He  knew 
that  there  was  no  other  agency  so  valuable  for  the  purpose  of  spreading 
culture  among  the  people  as  the  public  library.  No  word  so  precisely 
describes  the  influence  of  good  reading  as  does  the  word  'culture/  Emer 
son  tells  us  that  the  word  of  ambition  of  the  present  day  is  'culture/ 

"Andrew  Carnegie,  the  great  leader  of  the  industrial  world,  desiring 
to  give  to  the  young  men  and  the  young  women  of  this  day  an  oppor 
tunity  for  education,  for  culture,  whose  value  to  the  young  he  realizes  so 
well,  has  devoted  the  enormous  fortune  of  over  one  hundred  million  dollars 
for  the  founding  of  public  libraries. 

"There  should  be  no  pleasure  like  the  pleasure  derived  from  reading 
a  good  book.  Emerson,  expressing  our  debt  to  a  book  says:  'Let  us 
not  forget  the  genial,  miraculous,  we  have  known  to  proceed  from  a 
book.  We  go  musing  into  the  vaults  of  day  and  night;  no  constella 
tion  shines,  no  muse  descends,  the  stars  are  white  points,  the  roses  brick- 
colored  leaves;  and  frogs  pipe,  mice  cheep,  and  wagons  creak  along  the 
road.  We  return  to  the  house  and  take  up  Plutarch  or  Augustine,  and 
read  a  few  sentences  or  pages,  and  lo,  the  air  swims  with  life,  secrets  of 
magnanimity  and  grandeur  invite  us  on  every  hand,  life  is  made  of  them. 
Such  is  our  debt  to  a  book/ 

"The  founding  of  public  libraries  is  the  surest  mark  of  advanced 
civilization.  The  origin  of  libraries  is  lost  in  the  dim  twilight  of  the 

early  ages.     When  they  commenced,   how  they   commenced,  we   do   not 

28 


434     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

know;  but  we  have  authentic  records  that  centuries  before  the  Christian 
era  the  temples  of  those  countries  of  the  East  where  civilization  had 
made  the  greatest  advances,  contained  libraries  of  clay  tablets,  carefully 
shelved  in  regular  order.  Among  the  Greeks,  private  libraries  existed  at 
least  four  hundred  years  before  the  birth  of  Christ.  The  Roman  Caesars 
returning  from  conquest  to  the  development  of  the  arts  of  peace,  estab 
lished  libraries  in  the  then  great  Capital  of  the  World. 

"But  the  United  States  is  preeminently  the  home  of  the  free  public 
libraries,  supported  by  taxation.  This  country  has  more  free  public 
libraries  than  any  other  country  in  the  world. 

"What  a  great  thing  it  is  for  our  people  to  have  these  advantages! 
The  foundations  of  our  Republic  are  being  well  laid.  The  family,  the 
church,  the  school  —  and  the  library !  A  people  who  will  adhere  to 
the  great  principles  of  the  sacredness  of  the  family,  the  church,  and  the 
school,  will  not  perish  from  the  earth.  Virtue  and  intelligence  are  the 
necessary  foundations  on  which  a  republic  must  rest.  Education  is  more 
necessary  in  a  republic,  where  the  people  are  the  sovereigns,  than  it 
is  in  a  monarchy,  where  the  people  are  subjects.  With  education  and 
the  library  comes  culture.  The  family,  the  church,  the  school,  and  the 
library  are  all  necessary  to  qualify  the  citizen  for  the  great  duties  of 
life.  .  .  . 

"Mr.  Carnegie  has  given  us  this  building  and  has  requested  that  it 
be  named  in  honor  of  the  great  emancipator,  Abraham  Lincoln.  Like 
a  number  of  others  who  are  in  this  room  to-night,  I  knew  Abraham  Lin 
coln  intimately  and  well.  We  are  proud  that  this  city  was  the  home  of 
Abraham  Lincoln  while  living,  and  now  that  he  has  passed  away,  it  is 
the  home  of  his  sacred  dust.  The  words  of  Mr.  Carnegie,  that  no  name 
should  be  coupled  with  the  name  of  Mr.  Lincoln  manifested  the  high 
est  appreciation  by  him  of  the  great  name  of  Lincoln.  He  was  a  noble 
man.  Only  forty-three  years  ago,  he  was  going  in  and  out  among  us, 
interested  in  the  local  affairs  of  our  city,  doing  his  duty  in  the  common 
affairs  of  our  community,  and  at  the  same  time  grappling  with  the  great 
questions  pressing  upon  the  attention  of  the  people  and  touching  the  life 
of  the  Nation. 

"My  friends,  in  the  language  of  Mr.  Carnegie,  Lincoln  has  been, 
'one  of  a  dozen  supremely  great  rulers  of  men  that  the  world  has  seen.' 
He  was  one  of  a  few  men  in  the  world's  history  whose  great  and  noble 
life  and  deeds  will  be  remembered  forever.  I  rejoice  that  he  lived 


LINCOLN  CENTENNIAL  435 

among  us  and  that  he  was  loved  by  our  people  while  he  lived,  and  that  his 
memory  is  fresh  and  green  in  our  hearts. 

"My  friends,  as  we  reflect  upon  the  progress  of  our  Nation  in  wealth 
and  power  and  influence  among  the  Nations  of  the  world  in  the  century 
just  closed,  our  hearts  swell  with  pride  and  thankfulness  that  we  have 
been  so  favored.  As  a  Nation  we  are  now  in  the  first  rank  of  the  nations 
of  the  earth. 

"Let  us  do  our  part  in  maintaining  our  national  supremacy.  We  can 
hold  our  place  by  standing  by  the  right  as  a  community,  as  a  State,  and 
as  a  Nation,  adhering  rigidly  to  the  foundation  principles  of  our  Re 
publican  Government,  cherishing  liberty,  and  obeying  law ;  upholding  the 
sacredness  of  the  family,  the  church,  and  the  school;  with  school,  the 
library  will  follow,  and  in  the  time  to  come  our  Nation  will  endure,  and 
its  people  will  cultivate  from  generation  to  generation,  a  better  and 
higher  civilization." 


CHAPTER  XXXIII 

CONSECUTIVE   ELECTIONS   TO    UNITED    STATES   SENATE 

I  WAS  twice  elected  Governor  of  Illinois,  and  have  been 
elected  to  the  United  States  Senate  for  five  consecutive 
terms,  and  as  I  write  this  narrative  I  have  served  in  the  Sen 
ate  more  than  twenty-eight  years.  I  consider  this  a  greater 
honor  than  an  election  to  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States.  I  owe  the  deepest  debt  of  gratitude  to  the  people 
of  the  State  of  Illinois,  who  have  for  so  many  years  con 
tinued  me  in  the  public  service.  To  my  many  friends  who 
have  so  loyally  supported  me  during  all  these  years,  I  am 
profoundly  grateful. 

I  have  already  referred  to  my  first  election  to  the  United 
States  Senate.  At  the  conclusion  of  my  first  term,  I  was,  on 
January  22,  1889,  reflected  without  opposition. 

The  country  had  turned  the  Republican  party  out  of  power 
and  elected  Mr.  Cleveland  in  1892;  and  for  the  first  time 
since  1856,  the  State  of  Illinois  went  Democratic  and  elected 
Mr.  Altgeld  as  Governor.  I  returned  to  Illinois,  from 
Washington,  to  enter  the  campaign  in  1894,  having  little  or 
no  hope  that  I  could  be  reflected  to  the  Senate,  as  I  sup 
posed,  of  course,  that  the  State  would  continue  in  the  control 
of  the  Democratic  party.  Having  been  twice  elected  to  the 
United  States  Senate,  I  deemed  it  my  duty  to  make  the 
best  fight  I  could  for  Republican  success,  regardless  of  my 
own  personal  interest  in  the  matter.  The  Democrats  were 
confident  they  would  carry  the  Legislature,  and  Mr.  Frank 
lin  MacVeagh,  who  is  now  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under 

436 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     437 

a  Republican  President,  was  the  candidate  of  the  Democratic 
party  for  the  Senate  to  succeed  me.  Mr.  MacVeagh  made 
a  canvass  of  the  State  as  a  candidate  for  United  States  Sen 
ator  against  me.  Very  much  to  his  surprise,  the  State  went 
overwhelmingly  Republican  and  elected  a  Republican  Legis 
lature,  insuring  the  election  of  a  Republican  to  the  Senate. 

While  I  had  made  the  canvass  of  the  State,  it  was  not 
until  after  the  election,  when  it  became  known  that  we  had 
elected  a  Republican  Legislature,  that  opposition  to  my 
reelection  developed  in  the  Republican  party. 

Mr.  George  E.  Adams,  and  Mr.  George  R.  Davis  who  had 
served  in  Congress  and  been  Director  General  of  the  World's 
Columbian  Exposition  at  Chicago,,  were  candidates  against 
me.  Mr.  Joseph  E.  Medill,  the  owner  of  The  Chicago 
Tribune,  also  considered  the  question  whether  he  would  be  a 
candidate.  He  advised  with  the  late  Hon.  John  R.  Tan 
ner,  asking  him  if  he  thought  that  he  (Medill)  could  be 
elected  if  he  could  secure  the  solid  support  of  the  Cook 
County  delegation.  Mr.  Tanner  replied  that  he  could  not, 
that  I  had  a  sufficient  number  of  votes  in  the  country  outside 
of  Cook  to  defeat  every  candidate;  whereupon  he  declined 
to  consider  the  possibility  of  election  at  all. 

The  Hon.  John  R.  Tanner  managed  my  campaign.  He 
had  served  in  the  Legislature,  where  he  had  been  a  very  in 
fluential  member,  and  was  then  chairman  of  the  State  Cen 
tral  Committee.  He  was  popular  and  possessed  shrewd 
political  sagacity.  Tanner  was  very  loyal  to  me  then,  and 
for  many  years  I  considered  him  my  closest  and  most  devoted 
political  friend.  I  have  always  had  the  firm  conviction  that 
if  he  had  remained  loyal  and  had  supported  me  for  reelection 
in  1900,  he  would  have  been  reflected  Governor  himself,  and 
would  have  succeeded  the  late  John  M.  Palmer  as  my  col 
league  in  the  Senate. 


438     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

The  Legislature  met  in  January,  1895.  I  secured  the 
caucus  nomination,  and  on  January  22,  in  the  joint  session  of 
the  Thirty-ninth  General  Assembly,  I  was  elected  the  third 
time  to  succeed  myself  in  the  United  States  Senate. 

There  were  a  number  of  very  complimentary  speeches 
made  on  that  occasion.  My  old  friend,  the  Hon.  David  T. 
Littler,  who  then  represented  the  Springfield  District  in  the 
Senate,  made  the  first  speech.  He  began  by  saying: 

"MR.  PRESIDENT:  Twelve  years  ago,  from  my  seat  as  a  member  of  the 
Lower  House  of  this  General  Assembly,  I  had  the  honor  to  place  in 
nomination  as  the  candidate  of  the  Republican  party  for  the  great  office 
of  United  States  Senator,  the  Hon.  Shelby  M.  Cullom.  I  took  occasion 
at  that  time  to  predict  that  in  the  office  to  which  he  had  been  elected  he 
would  show  his  usefulness  and  increase  his  reputation  not  only  among 
the  people  of  our  own  State,  but  the  whole  people  of  this  country.  After 
the  lapse  of  twelve  years  and  with  his  record  perfectly  familiar  to  the 
people  of  the  whole  country,  I  ask  you  Senators  whether  my  prediction 
has  not  been  fulfilled.  His  name  has  been  connected  with  every  im 
portant  measure  introduced  in  the  United  States  Senate ;  and  his  discussion 
of  important  questions  there  on  many  occasions  testified  as  to  his  patriot 
ism  and  as  to  his  ability  as  a  statesman.  I  take  great  pleasure  on  this 
occasion  to  place  in  nomination  for  that  high  office  the  same  Shelby  M. 
Cullom  who  has  served  the  people  of  this  State  so  long  and  so  creditably. 
In  doing  so  I  believe  I  state  but  the  truth  when  I  say  he  has  the  longest 
and  most  distinguished  record  in  public  life  of  any  man  who  ever  lived  in 
the  State  of  Illinois." 

Speeches  were  made  in  the  Senate  by  Senators  Coon, 
Aspinwall,  and  Mussett;  and  in  the  House  by  Representa 
tives  William  J.  Butler,  of  Springfield,  E.  Callahan,  George 
W.  Miller,  D.  S.  Berry,  A.  J.  Dougherty,  J.  E.  Sharrock, 
and  Charles  E.  Selby. 

I  was  present  in  Springfield,  and  was  invited  before  the 
joint  session  of  the  General  Assembly,  after  they  had  elect 
ed  me,  to  deliver  an  address.  I  appeared  before  the  joint 
session  and  expressed  my  obligations  to  the  members  of  the 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     439 

Thirty-sixth  General  Assembly  for  the  high  honor  conferred 
upon  me.  I  made  a  short  address,  reviewing  conditions  in  the 
State  and  the  country  generally,  and  concluded  by  saying: 

"The  prosperity  and  happiness  of  the  people  depend  upon  wise  and 
just  laws  to  be  enacted  both  by  the  State  and  by  the  Nation.  In  the 
discharge  of  the  high  duty  which  you  have  just  imposed  upon  me,  it 
shall  be  my  single  aim  to  do  my  part  in  so  shaping  the  policy  of  the 
country,  that  we  shall  soon  stand  upon  the  high  ground  of  permanent 
prosperity. 

"Gentlemen,  it  should  be  our  ambition  so  to  legislate  that  the  freedom 
and  rights  of  every  citizen  shall  be  secured  and  respected;  that  all  inter 
ests  shall  be  protected;  that  one  portion  of  our  people  shall  not  oppress 
another,  and  so  that  ample  remedies  shall  be  found  and  applied  for  every 
existing  wrong.  To  this  end  an  enlarged  humanity  bids  us  look  forward 
with  renewed  hope  and  trust." 

My  reference  to  the  Hon.  Joseph  E.  Medill  in  connection 
with  this  contest  reminds  me  that  I  should  say  something  of 
Mr.  Medill.  I  regarded  him  as  one  of  the  three  really  great 
editors  of  his  day  —  Horace  Greeley,  Henry  Watterson,  and 
Joe  Medill. 

He  made  The  Chicago  Tribune  one  of  the  most  influential 
newspapers  of  the  United  States.  At  times  Medill  and  I 
were  very  friendly,  and  he  gave  me  his  hearty  support.  At 
other  times  he  was  against  me,  but  we  always  remained  on 
speaking  terms  at  least,  and  I  admired  and  respected  him 
very  much. 

He  was  one  of  the  most  indefatigable  and  inveterate  letter- 
writers  within  my  experience.  From  the  time  I  was  Gov 
ernor  of  Illinois,  and  even  before  that,  and  almost  to  the 
time  of  his  death,  he  wrote  me  at  great  length  upon  every 
conceivable  public  question.  His  letters  were  always  in 
teresting,  but  as  he  did  not  avail  himself  of  a  stenographer, 
and  as  he  wrote  a  very  difficult  hand  to  read,  they  became  at 
times  a  trifle  tiresome.  I  have  retained  a  large  number  of 


440     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

his  letters,  and  as  they  are  so  characteristic  of  the  man  I 
venture  to  quote  a  few  of  them. 

"THE  CHICAGO  TRIBUNE,  EDITORIAL  ROOMS. 
"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM,  Feb.  6,  1887. 

"DEAR  SIR:  — 

"Well,  he  signed  the  bill,  and  it  out  of  the  woods.  All  right  so 
far.  His  signing  it  shows  that  he  is  a  candidate  for  a  second  term. 
That  was  the  test.  The  next  thing  is  the  composition  of  the  Board  of 
Commissioners.  The  successful  working  of  the  law  depends  upon  the 
action  of  the  Board.  There  is  an  impression  that  he  will  probably  let 
you  name  one  of  the  commissioners  and  Reagan  another.  If  that  be 
so,  let  me  suggest  among  other  names  Mr.  C.  M.  Wicker,  manager 
Chicago  Freight  Bureau,  for  the  position.  You  probably  know  him. 
He  has  had  large  experience  in  freighting,  and  is  widely  known  to  both 
shippers  and  railroad  men,  and  is  well  liked.  He  is  a  friend  of  the  law, 
and  supported  it  vigorously  while  before  Congress,  writing  some  good 
letters  in  its  explanation  and  defence  for  The  Tribune.  He  is  a  sound 
Republican  though  not  much  of  a  politician.  You  may  find  other  and 
better  men  to  recommend,  but  I  don't  think  of  any  belonging  to  this 
State  at  this  moment.  I  hear  Judge  Cooley's  name  mentioned.  He  is  of 
course  a  first-class  A  No.  1  man,  but  I  write  on  the  hypothesis  that  your 
preference  will  be  for  an  Illinois  man  if  you  are  allowed  to  have  a  say 
in  it. 

"The  passage  of  the  bill  is  a  great  triumph  for  you,  if  the  bill  works 
well.  People  always  judge  of  measures  by  their  effects;  hence  the  act 
should  have  fair  play. 

"Now  that  it  is  safely  in  the  shape  of  a  law,  I  thought  The  Tribune 
might  indulge  in  a  little  horn-blowing  as  per  enclosed  article. 

"Yours  truly, 

"(Signed)  J.  MEDILL." 

"HOTEL  PONCE  DE  LEON, 
ST.  AUGUSTINE,  FLA., 

"HoN.  S.  M.  CULLOM,  March  12,  1888. 

"Mr  DEAR  SIR:  — 

"I  have  just  received  your  favor  of  9  inst.  and  confess  that  I  am 
taken  a  little  by  surprise.  I  had  got  the  impression  from  various  quar 
ters  that  you  did  not  desire  to  secure  the  Illinois  delegation,  and  did 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     441 

not  want  to  be  considered  a  candidate.  Acting  on  this  idea  The  Tribune 
has  been  leaning  towards  Gresham  as  an  available  candidate,  as  you 
have  noticed.  However,  you  have  lost  no  ground  by  standing  in  the 
shade.  If  I  was  managing  your  boom  I  would  keep  your  name  in  the 
background  and  out  of  the  newspapers  as  a  candidate  seeking  the  nomi 
nation  until  the  last.  A  few  strong  judicious  friends  among  the  Illinois 
delegation  is  all  you  want  to  watch  events  and  move  quickly  at  the 
opportune  moment,  if  it  arrives.  I  should  say  that  on  general  principles 
you  would  be  the  second  choice  of  any  set  of  Illinois  delegates  and 
the  chances  are  all  in  the  direction  of  some  second-choice  candidate. 
Harrison  is  likely  to  have  a  pledged  delegation  from  Indiana,  but  what 
good  will  it  do  him?  Logan  had  a  pledged  delegation  from  Illinois; 
Sherman,  from  Ohio;  Windom,  from  Minn.;  and  Hawley,  from  Conn. 
The  convention  will  be  largely  chiefly  actuated  and  governed  by  the  avail 
ability  idea.  Personal  friendship  won't  count  for  much  in  that  search 
for  the  most  available  candidate.  This  you  see  as  clearly  as  I  do.  What 
ever  Western  man  the  New  York  delegation  (or  the  majority  of  them) 
favor  will  stand  a  good  chance  of  getting  it.  It  is  almost  impossible  to 
figure  out  a  victory  without  the  electoral  vote  of  New  York.  Indiana 
and  Connecticut  would  be  absolutely  indispensable  in  the  absence  of  New 
York.  But  even  then  we  have  doubtful  States  that  voted  for  Elaine. 
Michigan,  for  instance,  and  the  three  Pacific  Coast  States,  in  case  any 
such  man  as  Sherman,  Harrison,  or  Hawley,  who  voted  against  restrict 
ing  Chinese  immigration,  should  be  nominated.  And  then  it  remains  to 
be  seen  what  sort  of  action  will  be  had  in  Congress  on  tariff  reduction. 
If  we  are  obliged  to  go  before  the  people  defending  the  present  tariff, 
that  is  breeding  trust  monopolies  all  over  the  country,  a  nomination  will 
not  be  worth  having.  High  protection  is  a  nice  thing  for  those  who 
pocket  it,  but  not  so  fascinating  to  the  unprotected  classes  who  have  to 
pay  the  big  bounties  out  of  their  products  sold  at  free  trade  prices.  All 
these  things  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  I  am  about  leaving  Florida 
for  home,  either  via  Atlantic  or  Washington.  If  the  latter,  I  shall  see 
you  when  I  get  there,  when  we  can  talk  over  the  whole  matter  more  fully 
than  on  paper.  All  I  can  really  say  is,  I  am  peering  about  in  the  dark 
for  the  strongest  candidate,  the  most  available  man  on  an  available  plat 
form,  and  even  then  we  shall  have  desperate  hard  work  to  win  in  the 
face  of  the  immense  losses  our  party  is  suffering  from  the  ravages  in 
our  rank  and  file,  committed  by  the  prohibitionists.  We  shall  have  to 
face  a  loss  of  fifty  thousand  in  New  York.  How  is  that  to  be  made 


442     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

good?  and  twenty-five  thousand  to  thirty  thousand  in  Illinois  and  five  to 
seven  thousand  in  Indiana,  and  thirty  thousand  in  Michigan.  How  can 
we  stand  this  loss  of  blood  and  men? 

"(Signed)  J.  MEDILL." 

"NIAGARA  FALLS,  N.  Y., 

Aug.  5,  1888. 
"My  DEAR  SIR:  — 

"Searching  for  a  cool  place  I  found  it  here,  where  I  shall  remain  a  few 
days  and  then  proceed  to  Kaetershill  Mountain  top,  which  is  the  best  hot- 
weather  place  I  found  last  year. 

"I  take  it  for  granted  that  some  of  your  friends  keep  you  posted  about 
the  secret  negotiations  going  on  between  Palmer  and  the  Socialistic  Labor 
element  for  a  fusion.  You  have  seen  by  The  Tribune  that  all  the  labor 
element  is  not  disposed  to  support  Palmer,  in  consideration  of  his  pardon 
ing  the  imprisoned  anarchists.  You  may  rely  on  The  Tribune  venti 
lating  this  unholy  alliance.  At  the  same  time  there  are  ten  thousand  to 
twelve  thousand  of  those  socialists  who  will  vote  for  Palmer  and  the  Dem 
ocratic  ticket  in  Cook  County;  and  this  fusion  may  with  the  aid  of  the 
prohibitionists  cost  the  Republicans  second  seats  in  the  Legislature, 
which  is  the  phase  of  the  matter  in  which  you  are  specially  interested. 
There  is  considerable  coldness  among  the  Irish  Catholics  toward  Cleve 
land,  but  whether  it  will  continue  until  election  night  remains  to  be  seen. 
They  think  he  is  too  pro-English,  but  they  dislike  Harrison.  Elaine  was 
their  ideal. 

"I  have  spent  a  good  deal  of  spare  time  to  point  out  flaws  and  tricks 
in  the  sugar  and  whiskey  sections  of  the  Mills  bill.  The  latter  really 
opens  and  invites  universal  evasion  of  taxes  and  the  multiplication  of 
small  moonshine  distilleries;  and  the  former  perpetuates  the  sugar  trust 
profits  and  affords  the  public  no  relief. 

"The  Republican  members  of  the  House  did  not  expose  these  defects 
enough.  Cannon  did  well  on  sugar,  but  nobody  dissected  the  whiskey 
sections  which  bored  gimlet  holes  into  the  bottom  of  every  barrel  of  high 
wine  to  let  it  out  without  paying  a  cent  of  tax.  The  Democrats  are  there 
fore  the  real  free  whiskeyites.  This  ought  to  be  shown  up  thoroughly  in 
the  Senate.  Our  miserable  platform  places  us  on  the  defensive.  The 
Mills  bill  places  the  Democrats  on  the  defensive  if  it  is  rightly  handled. 
I  do  not  mean  attacking  the  free  wool  part  of  it,  for  that  portion  if  en 
acted  would  do  your  constituents  certainly  ten  or  twenty  times  more 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     443 

good  than  harm,  nor  the  free  lumber  or  free  salt  or  free  soap,  etc.,  etc., 
which  would  benefit  all  Illinois;  but  I  mean  fraud  free  sugar,  and  fraud 
free  whiskey,  and  a  hundred  per  cent  tax  on  rice  —  these  are  the  things 
to  hit.  On  these  the  Democrats  are  placed  with  their  noses  on  the 
grindstone. 

"I  have  been  reading  the  discussion  in  the  Senate  over  your  resolution 
in  regard  to  the  competition  of  the  Canadian  railways  with  our  transcon 
tinental  railway  freight  charges.  It  is  well  enough  perhaps  to  inquire 
into  the  matter,  but  I  have  a  notion  that  the  sharp  competition  is  of  great 
benefit  to  the  masses.  I  know  that  I  am  a  little  heterodox  in  looking 
at  the  interest  of  the  consumers  instead  of  railroad  plutocrats,  of  the 
millions  instead  of  the  millionaires,  but  I  can't  help  it.  Senator  Gor 
man  had  much  to  say  in  his  speech  about  the  undue  advantage  the  Ca 
nadian  roads  had  over  ours  by  reason  of  Government  subsidies  received 
in  constructing  the  Canadian  railways,  and  to  a  line  of  steamers  from 
Victoria  to  Japan  and  Hongkong.  But  his  memory  failed  in  the  most 
astonishing  manner  to  recall  and  perceive  the  fact  that  all  the  American 
roads  west  of  the  Mississippi  to  the  Pacific  have  been  enormously  sub 
sidized  by  our  Government.  In  fact  the  subsidies  amount  to  a  good  deal 
more  than  the  actual  total  cost  of  the  construction  of  the  whole  of  them. 
For  twenty  years  some  of  these  roads  have  been  plundering  the  Amer 
ican  people  by  the  most  outrageous  charges,  and  Congress,  the  people's 
representatives,  have  not  lifted  a  finger  to  stop  the  rapacious  robbery. 
And  now,  when  the  Canadian  road,  built  by  Government  subsidies,  begins 
to  compete  with  the  American  roads  built  with  Government  subsidies,  the 
latter  who  have  pocketed  hundreds  of  millions  of  subsidy  spoils  and  over 
charge  plunder,  appeal  to  the  Senate  to  protect  the  scoundrels  against 
a  little  healthy  competition,  and  Senator  Gorman  pleads  for  the  robbers 
on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  with  tears  in  his  voice !  So  whatever  extent 
the  competing  Canadian  roads  cause  our  contiguous  roads  to  lower  their 
freights  so  much  the  better  for  the  public.  They  act  just  the  same  as 
competing  waterways.  The  Grand  Trtmk,  beginning  at  Chicago  and  run 
ning  through  Michigan  to  Sarma;  crossing  at  Niagara  Falls  and  feeding 
the  Lackawanna  and  Erie  to  New  York;  running  to  Boston  through  Ver 
mont,  etc.,  and  also  to  Montreal;  and  the  Alden  line  of  steamers  carry 
ing  cattle  to  England,  as  a  healthy  competition  with  our  pooling  trunk 
lines  east  from  Chicago,  is  of  enormous  value  to  Chicago  and  all  the  ship 
pers,  cattle-dealers,  grain-raisers,  farmers,  and  merchants  of  half  a 
dozen  States  in  the  Northwest.  Any  interference  with  its  competitive 


444     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

activity  will  harm  millions  of  Western  people,  tending  as  it  will  to  in 
crease  cost  of  transportation  and  reestablish  trunk  line  pooling  mo 
nopoly. 

"So  the  competition  of  the  Canadian  transcontinental  at  the  Red  River 
and  at  the  "500"  ensures  cheaper  freights  for  all  Minnesota  and  Da 
kota,  and  the  effect  extends  clear  down  into  Nebraska  and  Iowa.  So, 
too,  the  Canadian  road's  rates  at  its  Pacific  terminal  —  Victoria  —  are  ex 
ercising  a  most  beneficent  and  ameliorating  influence  on  the  charges  of 
the  enormously  subsidized  Northern  Pacific,  forcing  down  to  a  reasonable 
rate  Pacific  Coast;  and  as  it  climbs  down  from  its  extortionate  schedule 
of  charges  the  Union  and  Central  and  Southern  and  Santa  Fe  Pacifies 
will  be  forced  to  do  likewise.  I  'd  give  something  handsome  to  have  had 
the  opportunity  to  reply  for  thirty  minutes  to  Senator  Gorman,  to  present 
the  other  side  of  the  question  from  the  American  standpoint.  On  one 
point  I  am  in  agreement  with  you,  viz:  that  the  British  flag  should  be 
removed  from  this  continent.  This  territory  along  our  northern  border 
should  be  incorporated  into  the  American  Union.  It  is  ridiculous  that 
Uncle  Sam  should  allow  a  foreign  power  to  hold  it.  We  have  as  much 
need  for  it  and  right  to  it  as  England  has  for  Scotland.  If  we  had  a 
respectable  navy  and  a  supply  of  fortification  guns  the  problem  would  be 
easy  of  solution,  and  won't  be  until  then. 

"Each  day  convinces  me  more  and  stronger  that  if  we  lose  this  elec 
tion  McKinley  —  will  be  the  cause.  They  make  the  party  say  in  its 
platform  "Rather  than  surrender  any  part  of  our  protective  system,  the 
whiskey,  tobacco,  and  oleomargarine  excises  shall  be  repealed."  The 
Democrats  are  making  much  capital  out  of  this.  The  tax  on  lumber  and 
on  salt  are  parts  of  our  "protective  system."  Now  the  Me.  plank  dis 
closes  that  rather  than  reduce  the  tax  on  lumber,  the  Rep.  party  will 
repeal  the  tax  on  oleo  butter.  How  many  farmers'  votes  will  that  gain 
us?  Rather  than  allow  any  lowering  of  the  high  taxes  on  clothes,  or 
salt,  or  lumber  or  crockery,  etc.,  the  tax  on  whiskey  must  be  repealed, 
and  the  old  evil  era  of  cheap  rofgut  and  still-houses  everywhere  shall 
be  restored !  Do  you  really  think  that  position  will  make  votes  for  us 
this  fall  among  the  farmers  ?  The  final  outcome  will  probably  turn  on 
the  character  of  the  Senate  bill,  of  which  I  am  not  sanguine.  About  two 
thousand  millionaires  run  the  policies  of  the  Rep.  party  and  make  its 
tariffs.  What  modifications  will  they  permit  the  Rep.  Senators  to  sup 
port?  We  other  thirty  million  of  Republicans  will  have  precious  little 
voice  in  the  matter.  Turn  this  over  in  your  mind,  and  you  will  see  that 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     445 

I    am    right.     Whatever    duties    protect   the    two    thousand    plutocrats    is 
protection  to  American  industries.     Whatever  don't  is  free  trade. 

"(Signed)  J.  MEDILL." 


WINDSOR,  N.  Y., 
"SENATOR  CULLOM.  Nov.  25,  1890. 

"DEAR  SIR: 

"I  did  not  think  the  blow  would  be  a  cyclone  when  I  saw  you  just  be 
fore  the  election,  I  knew  that  a  storm  was  coming,  but  did  not  dream 
that  its  severity  would  be  so  dreadful. 

"The  thing  to  do  this  Winter  is  to  repeal  the  McKinley  bill,  and 
strengthen  the  reciprocity  scheme  by  giving  Elaine  the  sugar  duties  to 
trade  on  —  freeing  no  sugar  before  reciprocal  equivalents  are  secured 
from  respective  cane-sugar  tropical  countries;  or  (2)  fail  to  pass  the 
chief  appropriation  bills,  so  that  an  extra  session  of  the  Dem.  Congress 
must  be  called,  and  that  party  must  deal  with  the  tariff  and  be  respon 
sible  for  their  action  or  failure  to  act;  or  (3)  pass  the  apn.  bills;  ad 
journ;  next  year,  have  the  Senate  defeat  the  Dem.  tariff  bill,  or  the 
President  veto  it,  and  go  before  the  people  in  1892  on  the  issue  of  stand 
ing  by  the  McKinley  bill  till  overwhelmed  and  wiped  out  in  Nov.  of 
that  year,  as  the  Whigs  were  in  '52  when  standing  by  the  Forsythe-Stone 
Law  of  Fillmore  and  Clay. 

"The  last  course  I  presume  is  the  one  that  will  be  pursued.  When  men 
who  are  statesmen  of  the  Quay-Reid-McKinley  calibre  start  in  wrong 
their  pride  keeps  them  in  the  same  downward  path  till  they  tumble  the 
whole  outfit  into  the  bottomless  pit. 

"I  do  not  consider  a  Presidential  nomination  for  any  man  worth  a 
nickel  on  the  issue  of  standing  by  the  McKinley  bill.  The  fate  of  Gen. 
Scott  in  '52  surely  awaits  him. 

"Either  of  the  other  mentioned  courses  might  give  our  party  a  fighting 
chance.  But  it  won't  get  it,  if  the  perverse  members  who  have  landed  us 
in  the  ditch  have  their  way. 

"Read  the  suggestions  from  the  article  from  The  N.  Y.  Times  for  Re 
publicans. 

"Yours  truly, 

"(Signed)  J.  MEDILL." 

I  was  elected  to  the  Senate,  the  fourth  time,  in  January, 
1901.  This  time  I  had  a  very  serious  contest.  More  op- 


446     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

position  had  developed,  and  there  were  more  strong  men 
against  me,  than  at  any  previous  election.  This  was  largely 
the  outgrowth  of  the  opposition  of  the  late  Governor  Tanner, 
who  had  just  completed  his  term  as  Governor  of  Illinois, 
and  who  had  announced  he  would  not  be  a  candidate  for 
renomination,  but  would  be  a  candidate  to  succeed  me.  I 
believe  it  was  mainly  through  the  efforts  of  Governor  Tan 
ner  and  his  friends  that  the  Hon.  Robert  R.  Hitt,  the  Hon. 
Joseph  G.  Cannon,  and  the  Hon.  George  W.  Prince  were 
induced  to  become  candidates,  in  the  hope  of  weakening  me 
in  their  respective  districts.  I  do  not  believe  that  either  Mr. 
Hitt  or  Mr.  Cannon  was  a  party  to  any  particular  scheme 
to  defeat  me.  They  were  candidates  in  good  faith,  and  as 
pired  to  the  office  of  United  States  Senator,  but  neither 
of  them  had  any  desire  to  defeat  me  unless  he  could  get  the 
office  himself. 

The  campaign  continued  for  a  year  or  more.  My  friends 
were  active,  as  were  the  friends  of  Governor  Tanner.  He 
had  a  horde  of  office-holders  whom  he  had  given  places  while 
Governor,  who  had  been  more  or  less  actively  working  for 
him  as  my  successor  almost  from  the  very  time  that  the 
Governor  entered  that  office.  The  bitter  personal  attacks 
made  on  me  by  the  Governor  and  his  friends  did  not  help 
him,  but  tended  rather  to  help  me. 

The  preliminary  contest  was  in  the  State  Convention  held 
at  Peoria  in  1900.  There  were  a  number  of  candidates  for 
Governor  before  that  convention.  The  Hon.  Walter 
Reeves,  the  Hon.  O.  H.  Carter,  and  Judge  Elbridge  Hanecy 
were  the  leading  aspirants.  My  friends  had  insisted  that 
I  should  be  endorsed  for  reelection  by  the  State  Convention, 
and  my  friends  controlled  the  organization  of  the  conven 
tion  and  elected  the  Hon.  Charles  G.  Dawes  temporary 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     447 

chairman  and  the  Hon.  Joseph  W.  Fifer  permanent  chair 
man. 

Governor  Fifer  has  always  been  my  friend,  as  I  have 
always  been  his.  He  was  a  brave,  gallant  soldier  in  the  Civil 
War,  in  which  he  served  as  a  private  until  he  was  so  badly 
wounded  that  his  life  was  despaired  of.  He  has  been  forced 
to  go  through  life  under  exceptionally  difficult  circumstances, 
never  fully  recovering  from  his  wound.  He  is  entitled  to 
far  more  than  ordinary  credit  for  the  success  which  he 
achieved  in  life.  He  is  an  able  lawyer,  and  as  State's  Attor 
ney  he  was  one  of  the  most  vigorous  of  prosecutors.  He 
was  nominated  and  elected  Governor,  and  gave  the  State  an 
honest  and  capable  administration.  He  was  renominated, 
but  local  questions  in  the  State,  combined  with  the  Demo 
cratic  landslide  of  1892,  resulted  in  his  defeat.  President 
McKinley,  on  my  recommendation,  appointed  Governor 
Fifer  a  member  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  in 
which  position  he  served  with  credit  for  some  years.  He 
resigned  voluntarily  and  returned  to  his  home  in  Blooming- 
ton  to  resume  the  practice  of  the  law.  I  have  always  liked 
Governor  Fifer,  and  consider  him  one  of  the  foremost  citi 
zens  of  the  State  living  to-day. 

Returning  to  the  Peoria  Convention,  over  which  Governor 
Fifer  presided,  I  will  only  say  that  Mr.  Reeves  had  the  votes 
in  that  convention  to  be  nominated ;  but  for  reasons  I  do  not 
care  to  discuss,  he  did  not  secure  the  nomination,  and  the 
Hon.  Richard  Yates  became  the  nominee.  I  was  endorsed 
by  the  convention  as  the  candidate  of  the  Republican  party 
to  succeed  myself  as  United  States  Senator.  The  opposi 
tion  to  me  in  the  convention  was  by  Governor  Tanner  and  his 
friends,  he  being  the  only  avowed  candidate  against  me.  I 
thought  that  the  endorsement  of  that  convention  should  have 


448     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

settled  the  matter ;  but  the  contest  went  on,  and  Messrs.  Hitt, 
Cannon,  and  Prince  entered  it  actively.     Several  others  were 
standing  around  waiting  for  a  chance,  and  this  continued  to 
be  the  situation  until  the  Legislature  met  in  January.     A 
sufficient  number  of  the  members  of  the  Legislature  to  elect 
me  had  pledged  themselves  in  writing  to  stand  by  me  as  long 
as  I  was  a  candidate.     The  other  candidates,  probably  aside 
from  Governor  Tanner,  did  not  believe  I  had  these  written 
pledges.     I  told  them  so,  but  they  did  not  believe  me.     Gov 
ernor  Tanner  and  his  friends  realized  that  I  would  have  a 
majority  of  the  caucus,  and  they  then  began  scheming  for 
the  purpose  of  having  a  secret  ballot  in  the  caucus,  hoping 
that  if  certain  members  who  had  been  pledged  to  me  would 
not  have  to  vote  openly,  they  would  go  back  on  the  pledges 
and  vote  secretly  for  one  of  the  other  candidates,  thus  de 
feating  me.     I  had  enough  votes  to  defeat  the  secret  ballot 
proposition,  as  many  of  the  supporters  of  Tanner  were  really 
in  favor  of  my  reelection.     Hon.  Fred  A.  Busse,  one  of 
the  most  influential  members  of  the  State  Senate  at  that 
time,  and  more  recently  Mayor  of  Chicago  —  one  of  the 
best  the  city  ever  had  —  and  who  has  long  been  my  personal 
friend,  was  pledged  to  vote  for  the  Governor,  but  at  heart 
was  strongly  for  me.     With  many  others,  Busse  would  not 
consent  to  a  secret  caucus,  and  this  really  ended  the  contest. 
Tanner,  after  trying  to  induce  the  other  candidates  to  unite 
on  him,  or  on  some  one  else  to  defeat  me  (which  proposition 
Mr.  Cannon  and  Mr.  Hitt  rejected),  announced  that  he 
would  withdraw.     Friends  of  the  Governor  in  the  Legisla 
ture  came  to  me  and  announced  that  Tanner  had  quit  the 
race,  and  later  Mr.  Cannon  and  Mr.  Hitt  came  to  my  room 
and  announced  their  withdrawal. 

This  ended  the  contest;  my  name  was  the  only  one  pre 
sented  to  the  caucus,  and  I  was  the  only  Republican  voted 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     449 

for  in  the  joint  session  of  the  Legislature.  It  was  an 
interesting  fight,  and  as  it  may  well  be  supposed,  the  result 
was  very  satisfactory  to  my  friends  and  to  me. 

When  I  returned  to  Washington  after  having  been  re- 
elected,  I  was  warmly  greeted  by  my  colleagues  in  the  Sen 
ate  who  had  been  watching  the  contest;  and  I  recollect  that 
Senator  Hanna  was  particularly  warm  in  his  congratula 
tions,  and  remarked  that  it  was  the  prettiest  political  fight 
he  had  witnessed  in  a  long  time. 

I  want  to  say  something  in  reference  to  the  Hon.  Joseph 
G.  Cannon,  who  was  a  candidate  against  me  at  this  time, 
and  who  is  now,  as  he  has  been  for  years  past,  the  leading 
member  of  the  Illinois  delegation. 

I  regard  him  as  my  personal  friend,  and  was  very  glad 
indeed  to  support  his  candidacy  for  the  Presidency  in  1908, 
I  being  chairman  of  the  Illinois  delegation  to  the  Chicago 
Convention  that  year. 

At  the  time  he  entered  the  contest  against  me,  he  had  long 
been  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  House  of  Representatives  in 
Congress.  After  refusing  to  enter  the  scheme  of  Governor 
Tanner  to  defeat  me,  as  I  have  stated,  he  retired  from  the 
contest,  was  soon  reflected  to  Congress,  and  almost  immedi 
ately  elected  as  Speaker,  in  which  position  he  continued  for 
a  larger  number  of  consecutive  terms  than  any  statesman 
in  our  history.  He  is  a  strong,  courageous  man,  and  a  man 
of  splendid  ability.  He  had  rather  a  stormy  career  as 
Speaker,  but  he  controlled  the  situation  all  the  time.  Dur 
ing  his  last  term  as  Speaker  he  might  have  gotten  along  with 
the  House  a  little  more  smoothly,  and  at  the  same  time  just 
as  satisfactorily  to  himself,  if  he  had  yielded  a  little  to  his 
colleagues  in  his  party  who  differed  from  him.  If  he  had 
been  disposed  to  do  so,  much  friction  could  have  been  avoided, 
and  at  the  same  time  he  would  have  had  his  own  way  in  caring 


450     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

for  the  interests  of  the  country.  I  have  believed  in  him  and 
have  stood  by  him  through  thick  and  thin,  and  I  know  he 
has  done  nothing  but  what  he  himself  believed  right. 

Joseph  G.  Cannon  has  his  own  notions  of  what  is  right  and 
what  is  wrong,  and  fearlessly  follows  what  he  thinks  is  right, 
without  reference  to  what  anybody  else  may  think  or  say. 
The  apparently  determined  effort  on  the  part  of  the  masses 
of  the  people,  and  especially  the  newspapers,  to  discredit  the 
Payne-Aldrich  Tariff  Bill  resulted  in  the  Democrats  carrying 
the  House  in  the  campaign  of  1910  with  the  result  that  in 
the  Sixty-second  Congress  the  Democratic  party  has  a  sub 
stantial  majority,  causing  the  retirement  of  Mr.  Cannon 
from  the  Speakership. 

For  a  time  Mr.  Cannon  was  apparently  very  unpopular, 
and  the  people  seemed  disposed  to  hold  him  responsible  for 
much  they  did  not  approve  of  in  legislation;  but  this  feeling 
is  passing  away,  and  Mr.  Cannon  will  be  regarded  as  an  able 
legislator,  an  able  Speaker,  a  man  who  has  during  his  service 
in  Congress  saved  the  Government  untold  millions.  His 
honesty  and  devotion  to  duty  cannot  be  doubted,  and  he  will 
go  down  in  history  as  one  of  the  foremost  leaders  in  Congress 
of  his  day,  when  those  who  are  now  criticising  him  are  for 
gotten. 

On  January  16,  1907,  I  was  by  the  Forty-fifth  General 
Assembly  elected  for  the  fifth  time  as  United  States  Senator 
from  the  State  of  Illinois.  This  was  an  entirely  different 
contest  from  any  previous  one  I  had  ever  had,  as  the  State 
had  enacted  a  primary  law  which  contained  a  proviso  that 
the  names  of  candidates  for  United  States  Senator  could  be 
placed  on  the  ballot  and  voted  for  at  the  primaries,  but  that 
such  vote  was  advisory  merely.  This  is  as  far  as  the  primary 
law  can  go  on  the  question  of  the  election  of  United  States 
Senators.  I  had  not  the  slightest  objection  to  having  my 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     451 

name  go  before  the  people,  the  individual  voters,  as  a  candi 
date  for  the  Senate.  The  first  primary  law  was  declared 
unconstitutional  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State,  and  as 
soon  as  I  heard  the  decision  I  promptly  wired  the  Governor, 
commending  him  for  his  announcement  that  he  would  call  a 
special  session  of  the  Legislature  to  enact  a  new  primary  law, 
and  I  took  occasion  to  add  that  I  hoped  my  friends  would 
work  with  him  in  the  passage  of  the  law,  and  that  it  would 
provide  for  a  vote  on  United  States  Senator. 

The  Legislature  did  enact  a  new  law,  providing  that  the 
primaries  be  held  in  August,  1906.  Former  Governor 
Richard  Yates  was  the  only  candidate  against  me.  He 
made  a  canvass  of  the  State,  and  a  very  thorough  one.  He 
had  considerable  advantage  in  that  he  had  almost  all  the 
politicians  in  the  State  who  were  holding  State  offices  actively 
working  for  him.  I  made  no  canvass  and  personally  did  very 
little  about  it  at  all.  I  was  willing  to  leave  the  matter  to  the 
people,  and  determined,  if  it  was  a  fair  vote,  to  abide  by  the 
result  of  the  primaries,  and  if  defeated  at  the  primaries  to 
support  Governor  Yates.  I  believe  that  Governor  Yates 
had  the  same  determination, —  at  least  his  conduct  after  the 
primaries,  in  withdrawing  from  the  contest,  would  indicate 
that  he  had.  I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  say  that  throughout  the 
contest  and  at  its  close,  he  acted  very  fairly.  He  made  a 
straight,  fair  fight,  and  lost,  then  abided  by  the  result,  just 
as  I  would  have  done  had  I  lost.  My  friends  in  different 
parts  of  the  State  took  an  active  interest  in  my  behalf,  for 
which  I  want  to  avail  myself  of  this  opportunity  to  express 
to  them  my  appreciation.  I  might  add  here  that  all  dur 
ing  my  public  career  it  has  been  my  good  fortune  to  have 
the  support  and  friendship  of  a  very  high  class  of  men,  men 
whose  honor  and  integrity  were  beyond  question,  and  who 
were  capable  of  filling  any  office.  I  cannot  undertake  to 


452     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

name  them,  but  I  know  that  they  will  understand  the  deep 
debt  of  gratitude  that  I  owe  to  them. 

It  was  very  flattering  to  me  that  I  carried  the  primaries  by 
a  substantial  majority,  having  carried  the  popular  vote,  a 
majority  of  the  Senatorial  districts,  and  a  majority  of  the 
Congressional  districts.  It  demonstrated  to  me  that  the  peo 
ple  had  confidence  in  me  and  were  satisfied  with  my  record  as 
a  Senator.  It  was  the  first  time  that  I  had  been  voted  for 
directly  by  the  people  for  any  office  since  my  reelection  as 
Governor  in  1880.  The  result  could  not  but  be  gratifying. 

Every  one  in  the  State  accepted  the  result  of  the  primaries, 
and  the  question  was  regarded  as  settled.  When  the  Legisla 
ture  convened,  I  was  the  unanimous  choice  of  the  Republican 
caucus  and  was  voted  for  by  every  Republican  in  the  Legisla 
ture  on  joint  ballot.  There  seemed  to  be  no  bitterness  or 
hard  feeling  on  the  part  of  any  one. 

After  the  general  election  in  November,  I  returned  to 
Washington  to  prepare  for  the  session  of  Congress,  and  there 
was  so  much  important  work  before  my  committee  and  in  the 
Senate  generally,  that  it  seemed  impossible  for  me  to  leave 
there  in  order  to  thank  the  members  of  the  Legislature  for  the 
high  honor  they  had  conferred  upon  me. 

I  addressed  a  letter  to  the  members  of  the  Forty-fifth  Gen 
eral  Assembly,  which  was  read,  and  from  which  I  will  quote : 

"I  desire  to  express  to  the  Republican  members  of  the  Forty-fifth 
General  Assembly  my  profound  gratitude  for  your  action  in  unanimously 
declaring  in  favor  of  my  reelection  to  again  represent  Illinois  in  the 
United  States  Senate. 

"In  electing  me  to  the  United  States  Senate  for  five  consecutive  terms. 
a  greater  distinction  will  be  conferred  by  the  State  than  has  been  con 
ferred  upon  any  other  man  in  the  history  of  Illinois. 

"I  shall  appreciate  this  election  the  more,  because  for  the  first  time 
the  question  of  the  selection  of  a  United  States  Senator  was  submitted 


CONSECUTIVE  ELECTIONS  TO  SENATE     453 

to  the  people,  and  without  any  active  campaign  on  my  part,  the  great  ma 
jority  of  the  voters  declared  me  to  be  their  preference. 

"Until  the  recent  primaries,  my  name  had  not  been  submitted  directly 
to  the  voters  of  the  State  since  I  was  reflected  Governor  in  1880,  and 
it  was  no  small  gratification  to  me,  after  twenty-six  years  had  come  and 
gone,  to  have  this  expression  of  continued  confidence  and  approval  of  my 
record  as  a  Senator. 

"I  wish  now  to  return  my  most  sincere  thanks  to  the  people  of  the  State 
who  have  thus  signally  honored  me. 

"During  the  twenty-four  years  I  have  represented  the  State  in  the 
Senate,  I  have  endeavored  to  the  best  of  my  ability  to  perform  my  whole 
duty  to  the  country  and  the  State,  and  the  only  pledge  I  can  make  is, 
that  I  shall  continue  in  the  performance  of  my  duty  in  the  future  as  in 
the  past. 

"I  would  prefer  to  have  the  pleasure  of  being  present  when  a  Sena 
torial  election  takes  place,  in  order  to  express  personally  to  the  Legisla 
ture  my  appreciation;  but  there  are  so  many  important  questions  to 
settle,  and  so  much  important  legislation  to  enact  during  the  short  session 
of  Congress,  ending  as  it  does  on  March  4,  that  it  has  seemed  to  me  to 
be  more  in  accord  with  my  duty  to  remain  in  Washington  in  the  perform 
ance  of  my  official  business. 

"Your  Legislature  assembles  this  year  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest  era 
of  prosperity  that  has  ever  prevailed  in  this  country.  There  has  never 
been  a  time  in  our  history  that  we  have  had  so  long  an  uninterrupted 
period  of  prosperity.  This  prosperous  and  happy  condition  has  come  as 
the  result,  in  a  large  part,  of  Republican  rule  and  Republican  policy. 

"For  nearly  forty-five  years  the  history  of  the  United  States  has  been 
the  history  of  the  Republican  party,  because,  with  the  exception  of  two 
short  periods,  Republican  administration  has  guided  the  destinies  of  the 
Nation;  and  the  achievements  of  Republican  administrations  during  those 
forty-five  years  constitute  the  greatest  record  in  our  history,  and  that 
record  is  a  complete  defence  of  the  party  against  assaults  from  what 
ever  quarter. 

"We  stand  to-day  at  the  head  of  all  the  Nations  in  the  value  of  im 
ports  and  exports,  and  these  maintain  the  prosperity  our  country  has 
enjoyed  since  the  American  people  declared  in  favor  of  a  protective  tariff 
and  a  sound-money  standard. 

"The  people  do  not  prosper  under  vicious  government.  Good  govern 
ment  is  essential  to  real  prosperity,  to  properly  develop  and  to  advance 


454     FIFTY  YEARS  OF  PUBLIC  SERVICE 

ifc.  The  Republican  party  has  always  secured  for  the  Nation  stability, 
confidence  and  prosperity  at  home,  and  respect  and  prestige  abroad. 

"We  are  to-day  at  peace  with  all  the  Nations  of  the  world.  Perhaps 
never  before  in  our  history  have  we  had  such  intimate  and  friendly  rela 
tions  with  all  the  great  Nations  as  we  have  to-day.  Our  country  has 
the  respect  of  all  the  Governments  of  the  world,  great  and  small.  We 
are  gradually  assuming  the  first  place  among  the  naval  powers;  but, 
unlike  the  older  Nations,  we  are  acquiring  a  great  navy  in  the  interest 
of  peace.  Under  the  policy  of  this  Government,  such  a  navy  is  one  of 
the  surest  assurances  against  war.  The  Nations  know  that  the  United 
States  stands  for  peace,  and  under  Roosevelt's  Republican  administra 
tion,  greater  progress  has  been  made  in  the  direction  of  international 
arbitration  as  a  means  of  settling  disputes  among  nations  than  under  any 
other  previous  administration  in  our  history. 

"While  the  nations  know  that  we  stand  for  peace,  they  also  know  that 
we  will  not  tamely  submit  to  the  imposition  of  wrong,  or  to  offence 
against  our  own  honor  and  dignity,  or  to  the  oppression  of  our  sister  re 
publics  in  this  Western  world.  We  have  no  desire  to  rob  these  repub 
lics  of  their  independence,  or  a  single  foot  of  their  territory.  Our  recent 
action  in  Cuba  has  been  an  object  lesson  to  these  republics,  and  to  the 
world  at  large,  of  our  disinterested  friendship.  As  we  have  repeatedly 
assured  them,  our  only  desire  is  that  they  shall  follow  us  in  peace  and 
prosperity. 

"The  construction  of  the  great  canal  across  the  Isthmus  of  Panama 
will  bind  them  closer  to  us,  and  at  the  same  time  will  almost  double  our 
strength  as  a  naval  power. 

"Too  much  credit  can  not  be  given  to  President  Roosevelt  for  the  great 
and  wonderful  results  which  he  has  accomplished  in  the  interest  of  his 
country,  but  the  legislative  branch  of  the  Government  has  done  its  full 
share. 

"The  record  made  during  the  last  session  of  Congress  in  the  enactment 
of  wise  laws  for  the  direct  benefit  of  the  people  has  not  been  equalled 
since  the  Civil  War  —  if  at  all,  since  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 

"I  will  not  detain  the  caucus  longer  than  to  repeat  my  sincere  obli 
gations  to  you  and  to  express  through  you  my  thanks  to  the  people  of 
the  State,  whose  representatives  you  are,  for  the  signal  honor  that  has 
been  conferred  upon  me." 


CHAPTER  XXXIV 

CONCLUSION 

ENERALLY  I  might  say  that  I  am  quite  content;  but 
VJT  as  I  sit  down  now  in  the  evening  time  of  my  life,  it  is  a 
source  of  sadness  and  wonder  to  me  that  I  have  survived  both 
my  wives  and  all  my  children.  One  by  one  I  have  laid  them 
away  in  beautiful  Oak  Ridge  Cemetery,  in  Springfield, 
where  I  myself  will  one  day  be  laid  beside  them.  I  have 
had  a  delightful  home  life;  no  man  could  have  had  a  more 
happy  and  peaceful  one.  As  I  look  back  now,  I  cannot  re 
member  that  either  wife  or  children  ever  caused  me  one 
moment's  pain.  I  was  twice  married.  My  first  wife,  Han 
nah  M.  Fisher,  to  whom  I  was  married  in  1855,  and  who  died 
in  1861,  was  of  a  very  amiable  spirit,  a  woman  of  more  than 
ordinary  culture,  and  was  the  mother  of  my  first  two  chil 
dren,  Mrs.  Ridgely  and  Mrs.  Hardie,  who  lived  to  woman 
hood,  but  both  of  whom  have  passed  away.  My  second  wife, 
Julia  Fisher,  was  the  sister  of  my  first  wife.  No  better  or 
truer  woman  ever  lived.  She  was  a  devoted  helpmate  to  me 
during  all  the  years  that  I  have  occupied  high  public  office 
and  needed  the  support  and  help  of  a  woman.  She  did  her 
full  part  and  filled  her  place  on  every  occasion  with  dignity 
and  propriety.  It  seems  that  her  death  is  the  last  great 
sorrow  I  shall  have  to  bear. 

The  memory  of  the  children  whom  I  lost  in  their  infancy 
is  naturally  dimmed  by  the  passage  of  time,  but  it  is  hard  for 
me  to  understand  the  justice  of  things  when  I  remember  the 
death  of  my  two  daughters,  Ella,  wife  of  William  Barret 

455 


456  CONCLUSION 

Ridgely,  and  Carrie,  wife  of  Robert  Gordon  Hardie,  who 
were  taken  just  in  the  very  prime  of  womanhood,  just  in  the 
most  beautiful  period  of  a  woman's  life,  and  just  at  a  time 
when  they  had  the  most  to  live  for. 

As  I  think  of  it  now,  I  do  not  know  where  I  obtained  the 
strength  to  survive  all  these  sorrows.  I  have  no  great  fear  of 
death,  except  the  natural  dread  of  the  physical  pain  which 
usually  accompanies  it.  I  certainly  wish  beyond  any  words 
I  have  power  to  express  that  I  could  have  greater  assurance 
that  there  will  be  a  reuniting  with  those  we  love  and  those 
who  have  loved  us  in  some  future  world ;  but  from  my  read 
ing  of  Scripture,  and  even  admitting  that  there  is  a  here 
after,  I  cannot  find  any  satisfactory  evidence  to  warrant 
such  a  belief.  Could  I  believe  that  I  should  meet  the  loved 
ones  who  have  gone  before,  I  do  not  know  but  that  I  should 
look  forward  with  pleasure  to  the  "passing  across."  Not 
having  this  belief,  I  am  quite  content  to  stay  where  I  am  as 
long  as  I  can;  and  finally,  when  old  Charon  appears  to  row 
me  over  the  river  Styx,  I  shall  be  ready  to  go. 


INDEX 


Adams,  Charles  Francis,  junior,  308. 

Adams,  George  E.,  203,  437. 

Alaskan    boundary,    controversy    over, 

300,  360,  403. 
Aldrich,  Nelson  W.,  37,  206,  209,  321, 

327,  332,  374,  421,  423,  425,  426. 
Aldrich-Payne  Tariff  Bill,  the,  304,  375, 

421. 

Algeciras  Conference,  the,  415-417. 
Alger,  Russell  A.,  284,  285. 
Allen,  G.  T.,  190. 
Allen,  J.  C.,  334. 
Allen,  William  J.,  333,  334. 
Allison,  William  B.,  116,  128-131,  156, 

188,  207,  244,  246,  273,  274,  314,  322, 

347. 

Altgeld,  Governor,  270,  271,  436. 
Alton,  school  question  of,  191. 
Ames,  Oakes,  139,  140. 
Amphictyon   Society   at  Mount  Morris 

seminary,  7. 
Anderson,  Judge,  334. 
Andrews,  Governor,  45. 
Anthony,  Senator,  206. 
Antietam,  battle  of,  91. 
Arbitration,  settlement  of  international 

disputes  by,  396-406,  426,  454. 
Army  of  the  Tennessee,  181. 
Arthur,  Chester  A.,  131,  178,  179,  187, 

204,  205,  224,  231. 
Ashmon,  George  F.,  89. 
Aspinwall,  Senator,  438. 


Babcock,  Mr.,  251. 

Bacon,  Augustus  O.,  352,  353,  358,  387, 
408,  425. 


Bailey,  Senator,  425. 

Baker,  David  J.,  19. 

Baker,  E.  D.,  41,  83,  198. 

Baker,  Henry  S.,  190. 

Bancroft,  J.  C.,  147. 

Bankhead,  Senator,  425. 

Banks,  Nathaniel  P.,  132,  133. 

Barbary  pirates,  see  Morocco. 

B  arbour,  Mr.,  of  Virginia,  339. 

Bayard,  Thos.  F.,  37,  38,  207,  226. 

Beck,  Senator,  207,  226,  227. 

Bell,  John,  59,  61. 

Benton,  Senator,  131,  309. 

Berry,  D.  S.,  438. 

Bethea,  Judge  Solomon  H.,  53,  54. 

Beveridge,  Albert  J.,  201,  362. 

Bimetallism,  see  Silver  Agitation,  the. 

Bissell,  Governor,  25,  26,  180. 

Black,  Jeremiah,  153. 

"Black  Republicans,"  22,  61. 

Black  Warrior,  the,  14. 

Blackburn,  Senator,  229. 

Blaine,  James  G.,  115-121,  126,  127,  138, 
140,  156,  172,  173,  187,  188,  205,  224, 
225,  247,  252,  257,  279,  315,  345,  441, 
442,  445. 

Blair,  Frank,  96. 

Blair,  Montgomery,  95,  96. 

Blanchard,  Mr.,  318. 

Borah,  Wm.  E.,  424. 

Boutwell,  George  S.,  97,  136,  156. 

Boxer  outbreak,  the,  298,  299,  394. 

Bradley,  Senator,  425. 

Brandagee,  Senator,  425. 

Breckenridge,  John  C.,  58,  61. 

Brewer,  Justice,  248. 

Brice,  Senator,  265,  266. 

Bristow,  Joseph  L.,  421,  424. 

British  Joint  High  Commission,  360. 


457 


458 


INDEX 


Brooks,  James,  140. 

Brown,  John,  57. 

Brown,  Justice,  248. 

Brown,  Senator,  229. 

Brown,  William,  2. 

Browning,  Orville  H.,  40,  41,  52. 

Brownsville,  dismissal  of  troops  at,  356. 

Bryan,  Colonel  Thomas  B.,  256. 

Bryan,  William  Jennings,  201,  261,  263, 

275,  290,  429. 
Bryce,  Ambassador,  429. 
Buchanan,  James,  22,  24,  26,  29,  74,  75, 

225,  339. 
Buchanan,     Minister     of     the     United 

States  to  Panama,  383,  384. 
Buckner,  General,   275. 
Buffalo  Exposition,  291. 
Bunn,  Jacob,  183. 
Bunn,  John  W.,  54,  429. 
Burchard,  Horatio  C.,  10. 
Burnham,  Senator,  425. 
Burrows,  Senator,  187. 
Burton,  Senator,  345,  425. 
Bushnell,  Governor,  281. 
Busse,   Fred  A.,  448. 
Butler,  Benjamin  F.,  Ill,  140,  141. 
Butler,  Senator,  207. 
Butler,  William  J.,  45,  438. 


Caldwell,  Ben.  F.,  429. 

Calhoun,  John  C.,  151,  206. 

Calhoun,  Wm.  J.,  203. 

Callahan,  E.,  438. 

Cameron,  Don,  172,  183,  206,  321,  322. 

Campaigning  in  Illinois,  early,  48. 

Campbell,  Antram,  45. 

Canada,     dispute    with    over     Alaskan 

boundary,    300,    301;    treaties    with, 

360,    364,    367;    proposed    reciprocity 

treaty,  375,  378,  379. 
Cannon,  Joseph  G.,  422,  429,  442,  446, 

448-450. 
Capitol,  location  of  State,  159. 


Carlisle,   John    G.,    207,   229,   262,    263, 

265,  390. 

Carnegie,   Andrew,  431,  433,  434. 
Carr,  Clark  E.,  247,  248. 
Carter,  O.  H.,  446. 
Carter,  Thomas  H.,  363,  364,  408. 
Cartwright,  Rev.  Peter,  48-50. 
Cass,  Senator,  339. 

Central    and    South    America,    interna 
tional   relations   between   the   United 

States  and,  403. 
Central   Pacific    Railroad,   building   of, 

234. 

Cerro  Gordo,  battle  of,  198. 
Chandler,  William  Eaton,  233,  234,  346. 
Chapman,  P.  T.,  277. 
Chase,  Chief  Justice,  89,  93,  94,  95,  105, 

151,  158,  206. 
Chicago,    in    1784,    2;    growth    of    60; 

strike  in,  164;  fire  in,  192. 
Chicago,  Burlington,  and  Quincy  Rail 
road,  220. 

Chicago  riots  of  1893,  270. 
Chicago    Tribune,    The,   252,   437,   439- 

445. 
China,  the  "open  door"  policy  in,  296— 

299;    exclusion   of   immigrants    from, 

356. 

Church,  Lawrence,  77. 
Cicero,  citation  from,  337. 
Civil  Rights  Bill,  the,  151. 
Civil  Rights  case,  the,  336. 
Clapp,  Moses  E.,  421,  424. 
Clark,  Clarence  D.,  353,  425. 
Clarke,  Senator,  425. 
Clay,  Clement  C.,  101. 
Clay,  Henry,  3,  117,  151,  188,  206,  339, 

445. 

Clayton-Bui wer  treaty,  300,  380,  381. 
Cleveland,    Grover,    116,    195,    224-247, 

257-271,  275,  283,  286,  300,  315,  346, 

348,  436,  442. 

Cockrell,  F.  M.,  207,  217,  218,  347. 
Coffey,  Elizabeth,  1. 
Coffeys,  the,  of  North  Carolina,  1. 
Coles,  Edward,  17,  18,  20. 


INDEX 


459 


Colfax,  Schuyler,  175. 

Colombia,  relations  with,  212,  349,  359, 
382-385. 

Commerce,  Committee  on,  340,  344. 

Confederacy,  establishment  of  the,  75, 
101. 

Conkling,  Clinton,  51. 

Conkling,  James  C.,  51,  80. 

Conkling,  Roscoe,  116,  117,  119,  127, 
128,  157,  158,  172,  183,  204,  205,  224, 
225. 

Connelly,  James  A.,  54,  55,  286,  287. 

Conservation  of  natural  resources,  426. 

"Constitutional   Union   Party,"  59. 

Conventions,  National,  at  Chicago,  58, 
59,  118,  119,  170,  172,  173,  185,  186, 
205,  224,  276,  303,  351,  449;  at 
Charleston,  58;  at  Cincinnati,  117, 
121;  at  Minneapolis,  123;  at  Phila 
delphia,  199,  290,  293,  351,  360,  446; 
at  St.  Louis,  232,  272,  274,  280;  at 
Peoria,  446,  447. 

Cook,  Burton  C.,  42,  43,  110,  111,  190. 

Cooley,  Judge,  229,  440. 

Coon,  Senator,  438. 

Cox,  S.  S.   ("Sunset"  Cox),  140,  141. 

Crane,  Elder,  176. 

Crane,  Murray,  363,  425. 

Crawford,  Coe  I.,  421,  424. 

Credit  Mobilier,  139,  175. 

Creighton,  Judge,  334. 

Crisp,  Mr.  Charles  F.,  256,  264,  265. 

Cuba,  relations  with  Spain  and  the 
United  States,  14,  216,  290,  358,  375- 
377,  412,  413,  454. 

Culberson,  Senator,  425. 

Cullom,  Richard  Northcraft,  1,  2,  3,  4, 
84. 

Cullom,  Shelby  M.,  parentage  and 
birth  of,  1 ;  removal  to  Illinois,  2 ; 
education  of,  4,  5;  as  a  teacher,  5; 
journey  to  Mount  Morris,  5-7;  life 
in  seminary,  7-11;  classmates  of,  7- 
11;  working  on  farm,  12;  studying 
law,  12;  as  City  Attorney,  12-16; 
ill  of  typhoid,  12;  as  chairman  of 


Hawaiian  commission,  13;  in  the 
Illinois  House  of  Representatives, 
16,  22,  42;  first  speech  away  from 
home,  23-25;  joining  the  Republican 
party,  28,  29;  friends  in  Illinois,  35- 
56;  as  governor  of  Illinois,  36,  37,  43; 
election  to  Congress  in  1864,  46,  80, 
109;  introducing  Senator  Douglas, 
64;  second  election  to  the  Legisla 
ture  of  Illinois,  76;  proposed  as 
Speaker  of  the  House,  77,  78,  160; 
personal  recollections  of  Lincoln,  82- 
108;  chairman  of  Territories'  com 
mittee,  116;  attempts  to  prohibit 
polygamy,  141;  interest  in  the  im 
peachment  of  President  Johnson, 
143-158;  as  governor  of  Illinois, 
160-168,  172;  acquaintance  with^ 
President  Grant,  169-179;  senatorial 
career,  203-223,  436-455;  proposed 
candidate  for  president,  273;  visit  to 
the  Hawaiian  Islands,  286-290;  in 
terest  in  work  of  the  Railroad  and 
Warehouse  Commission,  306-312;  as 
a  member  of  the  committee  on  In 
terstate  Commerce,  314-330;  as  a 
member  of  the  Foreign  Relations 
committee,  338,  418;  views  on  Cana 
dian  reciprocity,  375,  378,  379;  views 
on  arbitration,  403;  attempts  to  stop 
practice  of  accepting  titles  and  dec 
orations,  407-411;  attitude  to  "in 
surgency,"  422,  423;  letter  read  at 
the  Lincoln  Centennial,  430,  431; 
dedicatory  address  at  completion  of 
the  Lincoln  Library,  432-435. 

Culloms,  The,  of  Maryland,  1. 

Cummins,  Albert  B.,  421,  424. 

Curtin,  Governor,  106. 

Curtis,   Governor,  45. 

Curtis,   Senator,  425. 

Czolgosz,  Leon  F.,  291. 


Damien,  Father,  288. 

Davis,  Cushman  K.,  339,  340-344. 


460 


INDEX 


Davis,  Judge  David,  35-38,  40,  52,  85, 

86,  121,  333,  334. 
Davis,  Frederic  I.,  411. 
Davis,  George  R.,  437. 
Davis,  Jefferson,  26,  58,  60,  T5,  180. 
Dawes,  Charles  G.,  446. 
Dawes,  Senator,  132,  207,  214,  216,  321, 

327. 

Day,  William  R.,  296,  302. 
Dearborn,  Fort,  2. 
Debt,  state,  of  Illinois,  59,  168. 
Deer  Creek,  4. 
Delmonico's,  dinner  at,  224. 
Democratic  party,  the,  3,  16-18,  22,  23, 

32,  59,  61,  62. 
T)enby,  Edwin,  409-411. 
Deneen,  Charles  S.,  55,  56,  429. 
Denmark,  treaty  with,  414,  415. 
Depew,  Senator,  246,  256,  280. 
Dillingham,    Commander,   387-389. 
Dillingham-Sanchez      agreement,      387, 

388. 
Dingley   Act,  the,  265,  283,  290,   368- 

371,  421. 

Dixon,  Joseph  M.,  424. 
Dolliver,  Senator,  331,  332,  421,  429. 
Donelson,  Fort,  181. 
Dorwin,  Harry,  45. 
Dougherty,  A.  J.,  438. 
Douglas,   Stephen   A.,  3,   4,  29-32,   34, 

41,  42,  44,  52,  58-64,  72,  73,  76,  87, 

181,  186,  315,  432. 
Douglas's    address    at    Springfield,   64- 

73. 
"Dred,  a  Tale  of  the  Dismal  Swamp," 

33. 

Dred  Scott  case,  26,  27. 
Drummond,   Thomas,   333,  334. 
Du  Bois,  Jesse  K.,  45,  135,  180. 
Duncan,  Joseph,  19. 


Edmunds,  George  F.,  206-209,  224,  238, 
239,  255,  313,  321,  353. 


Edwards,  Benjamin  S.,  12,  16,  20,  21, 

24,  84. 

Elk  Spring  Valley,  Kentucky,  1. 
Emerson,  citation  from,  433. 
Evarts,  Senator,  122,  156,  184,  229-231, 

321,  325,  327. 
Everett,  Edward,  59. 


Fairbanks,    Charles    W.,    334,    360-362, 

427. 

Farnsworth,  John  F.,  Ill,  157. 
Farwell,  Charles  B.,  126,  173,  250,  251. 
Federal  Election  Bill,  see  "Force  Bill," 

the. 

Fessenden,  Senator,  157. 
Fielding,   Mr.,  378. 
Fifer,  Joseph  W.,  201,  447. 
Fillmore,  President,  22,  24,  25,  76,  445. 
"Fillmore  Ticket,"  the,  16. 
Fink,  Mr.,  318. 
Fish,  Secretary  of  State,  8. 
Fisher,  Hannah  M.,  456. 
Fisher,  Julia,   456. 
Fisheries  dispute,  403. 
Fletcher,   Senator,  425. 
Flood,  H.  D.,  411. 
"Flying  Squadron,  the,"  201. 
Foraker,  Hon.  J.  B.,  355-358,  360,  366. 
"Force  Bill,"  the,  255. 
Ford,  citation  from,  20. 
Foreign     Affairs     Committee     of     the 

House,  8,  407,  409,  411. 
Foreign  Relations,  Committee  on,  8,  9, 

302,  330,  338-379,  381-386,  391,  396, 

400,  404,  405,  407,  409,  411,  414,  415, 

418. 

Forsythe-Stone  Law,  the,  445. 
Foster,   Senator,  425. 
Fort  Sumter,  63,  75. 
Foundery  Methodist  Church,  134. 
Freedman's    Bureau  bill,   150. 
Free-soil  party,  see   Republican  party. 
Free  Trade,  129,  137,  242,  243,  246,  258, 

260,  264-270,  274,  275,  421-425,  441. 


INDEX 


461 


"Free  Trade  Party,"  the,  228. 
Fremont,  as  presidential  candidate,  16, 

22,  24,  25,  76. 
Frye,    William   P.,   207,   240,   282,   316, 

321,  322,  344-347,  350. 
Fuller,  Melville  W.,  236-242,  303,  333, 

429. 


Gallinger,  Jacob  H.,  347,  348,  425. 

Gamble,  Senator,  425. 

Garfield,  James  R.,  120,  122-128,  131, 
186,  204,  205. 

Geneva  Convention,  404. 

George,  Senator,  207,  218. 

Gold  Democratic  Party,  the,  191. 

Gold  Standard,  the,  see  Silver  Agita 
tion,  the. 

Gorman,  Senator,  255,  265-268,  315, 
316,  321,  443,  444. 

Gowdy,  Judge,  237. 

Granger   Movement,  the,   306. 

Grant,  Frederick  D.,  178. 

Grant,  Mrs.,  170,  178. 

Grant,  Nellie,  178. 

Grant,  Ulysses  S.,  7,  8,  11,  92,  110,  124, 
131,  136,  146,  152,  157,  166,  169-179, 
182,  183,  189,  192,  198,  199,  217,  373, 
390,  414. 

Gray,  George,  229,  230,  390. 

"Great  Conspiracy,  The,"  189. 

Greeley,   Horace,   101,   439. 

Green,  Henry,  51,  52. 

"Greenback  craze,"  the,  122. 

Gresharn,  Walter  Q.,  246,  261,  262,  333, 
334,  441. 

Grimes,  Senator,  157. 

Grosscup,   Judge,  273. 

Guadalupe  Hidalgo  obligation,  15. 

Guam,  Island  of,  290,  412. 

Guffin,  W.  I.,  293. 


H 


Haines,  Elijah,  160. 

"Haines    Legislature,"   the,   160. 


Hale,  Eugene,  207,  219,  284,  321,  347, 

391,  423. 

Hallett,  Judge  Moses,  11. 
Hamilton,  Alexander,  210,  372. 
Hamilton,  Governor,  201. 
Hamlin,  Vice-President,  59. 
Hampton,  Senator,  207. 
Hand,  John  P.,  429. 
Hanecy,  Judge  Elbridge,  446. 
Hanna,  Marcus  A.,  273,  279-282,  344, 

359,  374,  386,  449. 
Hanson,  Nicholas,  18,  19. 
Hardie,  Mrs.   Carrie,  457. 
Hardie,  Robert  Gordon,  457. 
Harlan,  John  Marshall,  333-337. 
Harlan,  Senator,  135. 
Harper's  Ferry,  arsenal  at,  57. 
Harris,  Isham  G.,  38,  261,  315-317. 
Harris,  Thomas   L.,  23,  39. 
Harrison,  Benjamin,  119,  120,  126,  130, 

131,  138,  246-253,  257-262,  293,  302, 

321,  346,  441,  442. 
Harrison,  Peyton,  49. 
Hastings,  Governor,  280. 
Hatch,  O.  M.,  45,  91,  180. 

Hawaii,  government   for  the  Territory 

of,  9,  285-290,  296,  375. 
Hawaiian  Commission,  the,  13,  285,  349. 
Hawley,  Joseph  R.,  207,  215,  217,  224, 

322,  441. 

Hay,    John,    80,    90,    99-101,    295-300, 

365-367,   380-382,   385,   387-389,   393, 

399,  402. 

Hay,  Logan,  334. 
Hay,  Milton,  44,  52,  160,  295. 
Hay-Pauncefote  treaty,  the,  300,  380. 
Hayes,    Rutherford    B.,   117,   118,   120- 

122,  131,  172,  178,  179,  230,  335. 
Hayes-Tilden  contest,  the,  161. 
Hearst,  Senator,  234,  235. 
Helper,  Hinton  Rowan,  33. 
Henderson,  J.  B.,  158. 
Henderson,  Thomas  J.,  188,  203. 
Hendricks,  Thomas   A.,   133,   158,   224, 

229. 
Hennepin  Canal,  the,  222. 


462 


INDEX 


Henry,  Patrick,  372. 

Hepburn  Bill,  the,  294,  328-330,  356. 

Herndon,  William  H.,  44. 

Heyburn,  Senator,  425. 

Hill,  David  B.,  257,  265. 

Hitt,  John,  7,  11. 

Hitt,  Robert  R.,  7-11,  32,  285-287,  289, 

446,  448. 
Hoar,    George    F.,    207,    211-214,    216, 

230,  246,  255,  321,  322,  324,  353. 
Hobart,  Vice-President,  274,  345,  427. 
Hopkins,  Albert  J.,  264,  265,  429. 
Horse  Shoe  Reef,  in  Lake  Erie,  394. 
Hubbard,  Frederick  Adolphus,  19-21. 
Humphrey,  Judge  J.  Otis,  53,  54,  334, 

429,  430. 
Hurlbut,  Stephen  A.,  77. 


Illinois,  as  a  Free  State,  17,  19. 
Illinois  Central  Railroad,  85,  132. 
Illinois   Railroad   and  Warehouse  Act, 

307. 
Illinois  River  and  canal,  navigation  of, 

161. 
Immortality,    author's    views    on,    336, 

337,  457. 
"Impending  Crisis  in  the  South— How 

to  Meet  It,"  33. 
Imperialism,    or    Expansion,    287,    290, 

359. 
Inauguration    of   president,   change  of 

time  for,  213,  214. 
Income  Tax  case,  the,  241,  336. 
Income-tax  provision,  the,  268. 
Indian  Affairs,  215,  216. 
Indians,  treaty  with,  2,  15. 
Ingalls,   Senator,  207,  321. 
Ingersoll,  Eben   C.,   Ill,  112,  113. 
Ingersoll,     Robert     G.,     112-114,     117, 

122,  199. 

Inheritance-tax  law,   268. 
"Insurgency,"  in  the  Senate,  420-423. 
Interstate     Commerce     and     Interstate 

Commerce   Acts,   211,   215,   222,   227, 


230,  231,  255,  264,  294,  295,  305-332, 
341,  357,  426,  447. 
Isle  of  Pines,  412-418. 


Jay  Treaty,  the,  372. 
Jayne,  William,  43,  72,  429 
Jewett,  John  N.,  126,  334. 
Johnson,  Andrew,  43,  52,  104,  105,  110, 
112,  129,  136,  143-158,  182,  230,  414. 
Johnson,  Dr.,  citation  from,  337. 
"Johnson's  Reports,"  19. 
Johnston,  Senator,  425. 
Jones,  S.   H.    ("Sam"  Jones),  47,  188. 
Jones,  Senator,  265,  425. 
Judd,  Norman  B.,  42,  43,  190. 
Jusserand,  Ambassador,  429. 

K 

Kaetershill  Mountain  top,  442. 
Kansas,  as  a  Free  State,  15,  26,  27,  58, 

59. 

Kansas-Nebraska   controversy,   25. 
Kasson,  John  A.,  370,  374,  375. 
Kean,  John,  362,  363. 
Kelly,  William  D.,  116,  136-138. 
Keyes,  Isaac,  176. 
King,  Senator,  339. 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  133. 
Knott,  Proctor,  111. 
"Know-Nothing"  party,  the,  22. 
Knox,  Philander  C.,  304,  361,  378,  405. 
Kohlsaat,  Judge  Christian  C.,  276,  277, 

334. 
Kuhn,  Loeb  &  Company,  392. 


La  Follette,  Robert  M.,  420,  421,  424. 
Lamar,  L.  Q.  C.,  207,  227. 
Lamb,  James,  97. 
Lane,  Senator,  104. 
Laurier,  Premier,  378,  379. 
Lawrence,     Mr.,     Minister     to     Great 
Britain,  394. 


INDEX 


463 


Lawrence,  Rheuna,  51,  286. 
Laws,   proper  enactment   and   enforce 
ment  of,  454,  455. 
Lawyers  of  Illinois,  38,  41. 

Lee,  Robert  E.,  57,  92. 

Leland  Stanford,  Jr.,  University,  234. 

Leonard,  E.  F.,  55,  108. 

Leprosy  in  the  Hawaiian  Islands,  288, 
289. 

Libraries,  value  of,  431-435. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  3,  7,  12,  13,  28-32, 
34,  38,  40-42,  44,  49,  54,  58-64,  74- 
76,  78,  80-109,  115,  123,  133-136,  143- 
145,  152,  190,  192,  225,  233,  239,  241, 
276,  279,  285,  295,  334,  335,  414,  428- 
435. 

Lincoln,  Robert  T.,  124-126,  247. 

Lincoln,  Willie,  89. 

Lincoln   Centennial,  the,  428-435. 

"Lincoln  Centennial  Association,  The," 
429. 

Lincoln  Library,  the,  431-435. 

Lincoln-Douglas  debates,  the,  7,  29-32, 
63,  87. 

Lincoln^  address  at  Springfield,  63;  in 
augural  address,  75,  76. 

Lippitt,  Henry  F.,  423. 

Liquors,  prohibition  of  sale  of,  16. 

Littler,  David  T.,  50-52,  184,  438. 

Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  211,  280,  351,  352, 
356,  408,  425. 

Logan,  David,  40,  41. 

Logan,  John  A.,  25,  26,  37,  109,  118, 
128,  129,  172,  173,  175,  180-189,  194, 
199,  200,  215,  224,  313-319,  441. 

Logan,  Stephen  T.,  3,  4,  12,  39-41,  44, 
49,  52,  84,  86,  97,  156-158. 

Lurton,  Judge,  303. 


McClellan,  Captain,  85,  91,  92. 
McClernand,  General,  181,  196. 
McClure,  A.  K.,  225. 
McCook,  Anson  G.,  196. 
McCumber,  Senator,  425. 


MacDonald,  Senator,  362. 

McKinley,  William,  13,  50,  53,  118,  123, 
130,  131,  191,  210,  233,  243,  244,  253, 
254,  257,  269,  272-291,  294,  296,  329, 
343,  355,  360,  361,  369,  393,  444,  447. 

"McKinley  Tariff  Bill,"  the,  253,  255, 
258-260,  264,  265,  445. 

McLean,  John,  333,  334. 

McMillan,  Senator,  285. 

Macon  Road,  the,  193. 

McPherson,  Edward,  117,  121. 

MacVeagh,  Franklin,  436,  437. 

Maine,  the,  284. 

Manderson,  Charles  F.,  207,  220,  321. 

Manning,  Daniel,  226. 

Marshall,  John,  236,  333,  336. 

Marshall,  S.  S.,  111. 

Martin,  Senator,  425 

Mason,  Senator,  278,  283. 

Matheny,  James  H.,  23,  24. 

Mather,  General,  169. 

Matteson,  Governor,  190. 

Medill,  Joseph  E.,  118,  252,  437,  439- 
445. 

Meikeljohn,  Mr.,  412. 

Mercur,  Mr.,  116. 

Mexico,  relations  with,  400-404. 

Meyer,  Leonard,  137. 

Miller,  George  W.,  438. 

Miller,  John  F.,  339. 

Miller,  Justice,  208. 

Miller,  Senator  Warner,  315. 

Mills  Bill,  the,  243,  244,  246,  253,  254, 
445. 

Miner,  Louis,  45. 

Miner,  O.  H.,  45. 

Missouri,  settlement  of,  by  slave-hold 
ers,  17. 

Missouri  Compromise  repeal,  15,  29. 

Mitchell,  Senator,  321,  340. 

Molokai,  the  island  of,  288. 

Mondel  or  world  treaty,  396,  397,  402, 
404. 

Money,  Hernando  de  Soto,  354. 

Montezumas,  the,  198. 

Morgan,  John  T.,  9,  207,  285-289,  321, 


464 


INDEX 


323,  327,  339,  347-350,  353,  359,  382, 

383,  392. 

Morgan,  Governor,  204. 
Morgan,  Senator,  of  New  York,  152. 
Mormons,  see  Polygamy  in  Utah. 
Morocco,  treaty  of  peace  with,  415,  416. 
Merrill,   Justin   S.,   132,  206,  209,  219, 

321,  322. 

Morrison,  Colonel,  228,  229. 
Morton,  Governor,  of  Illinois,  45. 
Morton,  Levi  P.,  274. 
Morton,   Senator,  of  Indiana,  182. 
Moses,  the  historian,  citation  from,  19, 

20;  reference  to,  23. 
Mount  Morris,  seminary  at,  4,  6,  7,  10. 
Mud  Creek,  see  Deer  Creek. 
Murphy,  Senator,  265. 
Mussett,  Senator,  438. 


N 

National  Guard,  Illinois,  162,  164. 
National  Hotel,  Washington,  135. 
Naval   strength   of  the   United   States, 

454. 
Negroes,    attitude    to,    in    the    United 

States,  26,  27. 
Neutrality  laws,  14. 
Newlands,  Senator,  425. 
New  York  Tribune,  The,  296. 
Nicaraguan   route,  see  Panama  Canal. 
Nichols,  Mr.,  250. 
Nicolay,  Mr.,  80,  90,  95. 


Oak  Ridge  Cemetery,  108,  456. 

Oberly,  John,  306. 

Oglesby,   Richard  J.,  47,  48,   170,  175, 

180,  181,  183,  194,  196,  198-203. 
Oliver,  Senator,  425. 
Olney,  Richard,  262,  342. 
O'Neil,  Charles,  137,  138. 
Orendorff,  Alfred,  334. 
Orth,  Godlove,  S.,  116,  138,  139,  153. 
Ostend  Manifesto,  the,  14,  15. 


"Our   Presidents    and    How   We   Make 
Them,"  225. 


Page,  Senator,  425. 

Palma,  President,  413. 

Palmer,  H.  W.,  411. 

Palmer,  John  M.,  23,  180,  190-197,  266, 

274,  275,  437. 
Palmerston,  Lord,  394. 
Panama,  Republic  of,  212. 
Panama  Canal,  the,  212,  281,  349,  350, 

359,  380-388,  414,  454. 
Panic  of  1873,  161. 
Paris  Peace  Commission,  343. 
Parties,    political,   in   the    Senate,   425, 

426. 

Payne,  Henry  B.,  185. 
Payne,  Sereno,  421. 
Payne-Aldrich      tariff,      see      Aldrich- 

Payne  tariff  bill. 
Peace  Conference,  at  Washington,  75; 

at  The  Hague,  367,  396,  403,  404. 
Pearl  Harbor,  Hawaii,  improvement  of, 

289,  290. 

Pendleton,  Senator,  206. 
Pennsylvania   Avenue,   paving  of,   110, 

111. 

Penrose,  Senator,  425,  426. 
Pensions,  granting  of  liberal,  221. 
Perkins,  Senator,  425. 
Phelps,  Judge,  236,  238. 
Philippine  question,  the,  211,  212,  290, 

296. 

Phillips,  Alfred,  2. 
Phillips,  Isaac  N.,  2,  17. 
Pinckney,  D.  J.,  10. 
Pious  Fund  arbitration  case  with  Mex 
ico,  400,  401. 
Platt,    Orville    H.,    207,    215,   216,   249, 

280,  293,  315-318,  321,  322,  347,  353, 

356. 

Platt,  T.  C.,  235,  293. 
Platt    Amendment,   the,   216,  290,  375, 

413. 


INDEX 


465 


Plumb,  Senator,  208. 

Polygamy  in   Utah,   141-143,  206,  222, 

223,  242. 

Pomeroy  letter,  the,  94. 
Pope,  General,  92,  93. 
Pope,  Nathaniel,  333. 
Porto   Rico,   ceding  of,  to  the   United 

States,  412-414. 
Postal  savings  banks,  establishment  of, 

426. 

Powell,  General,  277,  278. 
Prentiss,  General,  187. 
Primary  law,  unconstitutionality  of  the 

first  Illinois,  450,  451. 
Prince,  George  W.,  446,  448. 
Proclamation  of  1863,  96. 
Proctor,  Senator,  234,  283. 
"Progressivism,"  see  "Insurgency." 
Protection,  see  Free  Trade. 
Protocol,  arbitration  by,  393-396. 
Pullman   Company,   125. 

Q 

Quay,  Matthew  Stanley,  235. 


Railroad  and  Warehouse  Commission, 
161,  306-312. 

Railroads,  in  the  United  States,  81, 
305;  regulation  of,  305-332;  senti 
ment  against  pooling  and  rebating, 
306,  322,  327. 

Randall,  Samuel  J.,  138. 

Ransom,  Senator,  207. 

Rawlins,  John  A.,  11,  169. 

Reagan,  Mr.,  of  Texas,  321,  322,  440. 

Reciprocity  treaties,  358,  368-378,  426. 

Reconstruction,  policy  of,  111,  143,  145- 
148. 

Reed,  Thomas  B.,  243,  244,  247,  265, 
273,  274,  280,  283. 

Reeves,  Walter,  446,  447. 

Republican  party,  the,  3,  16,  28,  59, 
180,  259,  453. 


Richardson,  William  A.,  52. 

Ridgely,  Charles,  46,  47,  269,  270. 

Ridgely,  Mrs.  Ella,  457. 

Ridgely,    Nicholas   H.,   46. 

Ridgely,  William  Barret,  456. 

Ridgely  National  Bank,  46. 

Rives,  Senator,  339. 

Robertson,  Collector  of  Customs,  127. 

Robinson,  James  C.,  47,  48. 

Rock  Island  (Illinois)  Arsenal,  207. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  131,  212,  218,  254, 

289,  291-304,  329,  330,  332,  345,  356, 

365,  375,  377,  382,  396-402,  413,  415, 

417,  454,  455. 
Root,  Elihu,  361,  365,  366,  391,  392,  395, 

402,  408,  417,  425. 
Rose,  James  A.,  429. 
Ross,  Edmund  G.,  158. 
Russia  and  Japan,  war  between,  299. 


S 


St.  Croix,  island  of,  414. 

St.  John,  island  of,  414. 

St.  Louis,  East,  strike  in,  162-164. 

St.  Thomas,  Island  of,  414,  415. 

Sanchez,   Minister,  387. 

Sandtown  Road,  193. 

Sangamon  County,  3,  24,  51,  76. 

Santo  Domingo,  fiscal  affairs  of,  387- 
392. 

Santo  Domingo  Improvement  Com 
pany,  390. 

Santo  Domingo  protocol,  387-392,  393, 
414. 

Sawyer,  Senator,  207,  220-222,  322. 

Schenck,  General,  129,  141,  142,  157. 

Schofield,  General,  192,  193. 

Scholfield,  Justice,  236. 

Schools  and  schoolhouses,  in  Illinois,  5; 
appropriations  for,  161. 

Scott,  General,  57,  107,  445. 

Secession  of  the  Southern  States,  74, 
143,  146. 

Selby,  Charles  E.,  438. 


466 


INDEX 


Seward,   Governor,   33,   38,   80,   89,   93, 

145,  147,  151,  341,  342,  414. 
Sewell,  Senator,  206,  321,  322. 
Sharrock,  J.  E.,  438. 
Shaw,  John,  18. 

Shelbyville,   political  meeting  at,  24. 
Shepard,  Dan,  188. 
Sheridan,   General   Phil,   165,   166,   182, 

192,  194,  196. 

Sherman,  James  Schoolcraft,  427. 
Sherman,  John,  122,  123,  124,  206,  209, 

210,  211,  224,  229,  246,  255,  281,  321, 

322,  339,  340,  341,  344,  355,  441. 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act,  254,  255,  292. 
Sherman  Law,  or  the  Coinage  Act  of 

1890,  254,  255,  263,  264. 
Shively,  Benjamin  F.,  367,  425. 
Silver  agitation,  the,  232,  256,  263,  264, 

269,  274,  275,  290. 
Simpson,  Bishop,  108,  134,  135. 
Singleton,  J.  W.,  77. 
Slavery,  2,  3,  17,  18,  26,  29,  58,  59,  74, 

76,  96,  151. 
Smith,  Garret,  175. 
Smith,  known  as  "Whispering  Smith," 

36. 

Smith,  Senator,  of  New  Jersey,  265. 
Smith,   William  Alden,  364,  425. 
Smoot,  Senator,  425. 
Spanish-American    War,    14,    210,    216, 

283,  284,  290,  293,  359,  412. 
Spooner,   John    C.,   216,   222,   229,   321, 

322,  347,  353,  355,  357-360,  366,  374, 

386,  419,  420,  423. 
Spooner  Act,  the,  359,  382. 
Springfield  Journal,  the,  46. 
"Stand  patters,"  the,  of  the  61st  Con 
gress,  421. 

Stanford,  Leland,  229,  234,  235. 
Stanton,  Edwin  M.,  145,  150,  154,  155. 
Stanwix,  Fort,  2. 
Star  of  the  West,  the,  75. 
Stevens,   Thaddeus,   110,   144,   147,   150, 

155,  156,  158,  206. 
Stevenson,  Adlai  E.,  260,  261,  429. 
Stewart,  Senator,  256. 


Stone,  Melville  E.,  429. 

Stone,  William  J.,  367,  408,  425. 

Strike  of  1877,  railway  employees',  162. 

Stowe,   Harriet   Elizabeth   Beecher,   33. 

Stuart,  J.  E.  B.,  57. 

Stuart,  John   T.,   12,  24,  81,  84. 

Sumner,  Charles,  144,  147,  151,  152,  158, 

206,  338-340,  351,  390,  391,  414. 
Sutherland,  Senator,  425. 
Swett,  Leonard,  78-80,  109. 


Taft,  President,  248,  261,  302-304,  361, 

378,  379,  405,  406,  419-427. 
Taney,    Chief   Justice,    26,    27,    94,    95, 

105,  236. 

Tanner,  John  R.,  437,  446-449. 
Tariff,  see  Free  Trade. 
Taylor,   Senator,  425. 
Tazewell,  County  of,  2,  3,  6,  24,  84. 
Telegraph,  use  of,  81. 
Teller,   Henry  M.,  184,  206,  229,  231- 

233,  321,  347. 

Tenure  of  Office  bill,  153,  154. 
Thayer,  Edward,  55. 
Third-term  elections,  171,  242. 
Thomas,  General,  155,  193,  335. 
Thomas,  Jesse  B.,  18. 
Thornton,  Anthony,  24,  114,  115. 
Thurman,  Allen  G.,  121,  207,  219,  353. 
Thurston,  Senator,  274. 
Tilden,    nominee    for    Presidency,    121, 

191. 

Tillman,  Senator,  266,  332,  425. 
Ting  &  Brotherson,  13. 
Titles  and  decorations,  attitude  of  the 

government  to  the  conferring  of,  407- 

411. 
Toledo,  Peoria  and  Western  Railroad, 

55. 

Townsend,  Charles  E.,  425. 
Townsend,  Representative,  236. 
Tracey  homestead,  destruction  by   fire 

of  the,  249. 
Travel  in  the  early  days  in  Illinois,  5. 


INDEX 


467 


Treat.  Samuel  H.,  49,  333,  334. 
Treaties,  provisions  in   Constitution  in 

regard  to,  8;  see  also  Arbitration. 
Trumbull,  Lyman,  24,  42,  43,  151,  152, 

154,  157,  158,  190,  353. 
Turner,  General,  191. 
Tyler,  John,  75,  150. 

U 

"Unholy  Alliance,"  the,  424. 
Union    Pacific    Railroad,    construction 
of,  139,  140. 


Vance,  Senator,  207. 
Van  Wyck,  Senator,  207,  221. 
Vest,  George,  207,  217-219,  321. 
Vicksburg,  Siege  of,  181. 
Vorhees,  Daniel  W.,  133,  134,  207,  239. 
321. 

W 

Wade,  Ben,  144,  150-152,  156,  158. 

Walker,   Rev.  E.  S.,  432. 

Walthall,    Senator,    230. 

War  Revenue  Act,  the,  290. 

Warren,  Senator,  425. 

Washburn,  E.   B.,  7,  8,  109,   110,   157, 

170,  171. 

Washington,  President,  171,  373. 
Washington     National     Tribune,     The, 

185,  186. 

Watterson,  Henry,  439. 
Webster,  Daniel,  151,  206,  351. 


Weldon,  Lawrence,  52,  334. 

Welles,  Gideon,  93. 

Wentworth,  John,  110. 

West  Indies,  Danish,  purchase  of,  414. 

Wetmore,  Senator,  425. 

Whigs,  the,  3,  22,  24. 

White,  Edward  D.,  242. 

White,  Horace,  429. 

Whitfield,  a  slave-holder,  15. 

Wicker,  C.  M.,  440. 

Wilcox,  Captain  T.  de  Witt,  407. 

Williams,  Archibald,  41. 

Williams,  "Cerro  Gordo,"  198. 

Williams,  George,  118. 

Willoughby,  James  A.,  277. 

Wilson,  Bluford,  50,  176,  177,  247. 

Wilson,  James,  304. 

Wilson,   Senator,   156,   175. 

Wilson  Bill,  the,  265,  266,  268,  269,  272. 

Windom,  Senator,  339,  441. 

Windom  Investigation,  the,  313. 

"Winter  of  the  deep  snow,"  4. 

Wolcott,  Senator,  255. 

Woods,  Judge,  248. 

World's  Fair,  at  Chicago,  256,  437. 


Yates,  Richard,  Governor,  45,  429,  447, 

451. 
Yates,  Richard,  War-Governor,  45,  52, 

54,  158,  169,  194,  195. 


Zane,  Judge,  205,  206,  223, 


DEPARTMENT 

Librnr 


HOME  USE 


All  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 


•newaU  and  Rechoroes  may  be  .node  4  day,  prior  to  tj)e  due  „„,. 
Books  maw  ho  DAn<*... i  i n. 


Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405 


DUE  AS  S  TAMPED  RFI  nyy 


MAR  2  A  1992 


foB«»o«      "™lKZ%£"^0m" 

LD21A-40m-ll,'63 
(E1602slO)476B 


oenerai  LIUKU/ 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


YC  51324 

BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


C03flba33flS 


.5 


